Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Presend MCP Server

by io.github.presendapp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Favicon lookup

favicon
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns the favicon URL a website declares: fetches the homepage and takes the first (or 'shortcut icon') href, resolved to an absolute URL, which may be a data: URI when the page inlines its icon (source: declared). If no icon is declared, or the homepage cannot be fetched, returns the conventional https:///favicon.ico with source: default and a note, without checking that it exists. Use it to display a site icon; it does not download or validate the image.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "favicon"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain to fetch the favicon URL for, e.g. example.com.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / domain / description
      Previous value: -""New value: +"Domain to fetch the favicon URL for, e.g. example.com."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: the declared-vs-default source distinction, the possibility of a data: URI, the fallback to /favicon.ico, and the explicit note that existence is never verified. This is exactly the extra context the annotations cannot convey.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Dense but front-loaded: it leads with the return value, then the mechanism, then the fallback, then the usage caveat. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description fully compensates by describing the return shape (URL plus source: declared/default and a note) and the failure mode. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret it is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Only one parameter (domain) with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the example already in the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource: returns the favicon URL a website declares, and explains the resolution mechanism (fetch homepage, take first <link rel='icon'> href). An agent immediately understands it differs from link_metadata or url_clean siblings.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Use it to display a site icon; it does not download or validate the image' gives a clear intended purpose and an explicit exclusion (no download/validation). It doesn't name a sibling alternative when one might overlap, but the when-to-use context is unambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Presend MCP Server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources