xportalx

fetch_api

Fetch structured JSON/XML data from any API endpoint. Best for REST APIs and data feeds. Cost: 0.01 USDC

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "fetch_api"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The API endpoint URL to fetch
`body`	No	Optional request body for POST/PUT
`method`	No		GET
`headers`	No	Optional HTTP headers

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedJan 31, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses cost and structured output, but omits side-effect warnings for non-GET methods, authentication requirements, timeouts, or error behavior. 'Fetch' implies read-only, but supporting POST/PUT/DELETE without caveats is a meaningful gap.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler. 'Cost: 0.01 USDC' is useful and the rest is tight and front-loaded.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Without output schema or annotations, description provides core purpose and cost, but lacks guidance on edge cases, response format beyond JSON/XML, or error handling. It is adequate for a simple fetch but not fully complete for an arbitrary HTTP client.

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?

Schema description coverage is 75% (url, body, headers described; method only has enum). The description adds no extra parameter details, but the schema is already self-explanatory for most params. At 75% coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states verb+resource: 'Fetch structured JSON/XML data from any API endpoint.' It differentiates from sibling fetch_page/fetch_pdf/crawl by targeting APIs and data feeds, making the tool's specific role unambiguous.

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?

'Best for REST APIs and data feeds' gives clear context for when to use. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, so it stops short of a full usage guide.

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

All xportalx tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?