get_capture_countCount how many times a URL has been captured by the Internet Archive Wayback Machine, and find when a URL was first and last archived. Returns the total number of captures plus the earliest and latest capture timestamps (YYYYMMDDhhmmss).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The page URL to count archived captures for, e.g. "example.com". |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "url": "https://example.com"
+ }
+]Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds that it returns timestamps in YYYYMMDDhhmmss format, providing useful additional behavioral context beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with purpose, then detail.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Simple 1-param tool with rich annotations; description explains output (count + earliest/latest timestamps) adequately. No output schema needed.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% with clear description of 'url' parameter. Description does not add new meaning beyond what schema already provides.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states verb 'Count' and resource 'captures by Internet Archive Wayback Machine', and distinguishes from siblings like 'get_snapshot' and 'list_snapshots'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Context of counting vs retrieving snapshots is implied but not stated, leaving some ambiguity.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Several tool clusters overlap heavily: ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, and ask_pipeworx_grounded are near-identical in purpose, and the five polymarket_* tools all target prediction-market analysis. The presence of a broad Pipeworx data layer alongside Wayback-specific tools under one server name further blurs boundaries.
Most tools use snake_case, but the pattern varies: many follow verb_noun (get_snapshot, list_snapshots, resolve_entity, validate_claim), while others are noun_noun (entity_profile, polymarket_edges, pipeworx_feedback, bet_research). Suffixes like _beta and _grounded are used inconsistently, and some names are long and descriptive while others are terse.
34 tools is far more than what a Wayback Machine server should need, and most tools (Pipeworx data queries, prediction-market analysis, memory, subscriptions) have nothing to do with the Wayback Machine. The server's stated purpose appears narrow, but the tool set is bloated with unrelated functionality.
For the Wayback Machine domain, only three tools are relevant (get_capture_count, get_snapshot, list_snapshots), and obvious operations like saving/archiving a URL, comparing snapshots, or handling deleted captures are missing. The Pipeworx-related tools are broad but not clearly aligned with the Wayback theme, so the core purpose is under-served.