Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

pageaudit

by online.pageaudit
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Audit dependencies

audit_dependencies
Read-onlyIdempotent

Read the saved page dependency inventory with HTML/browser evidence. Existing paid page-watch passes add continuing source checks and change alerts. Joining page markup, browser network results, domain registration and DNS observations, then keeping their change history. Browser evidence covers its page load. Source gaps remain unknown. Domain expiry and NXDOMAIN do not prove takeover. Task-token savings have not been measured.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "audit_dependencies"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesOwned saved audit or tab ID.
afterNoOpaque inventory cursor from inventory.next.
guest_tokenNoPrivate owner token returned by guest creation. Sent in X-Guest-Token; reuse it for this owner's resources.
events_afterNoContinue history after this event number. Default 0.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), so the description's real value is the epistemic caveats it adds: browser evidence only covers its page load, source gaps remain unknown, and domain expiry/NXDOMAIN do not prove takeover. Those caveats materially shape how an agent should interpret and present results. It does not describe pagination behavior or response shape, which keeps it below a 5.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The content is front-loaded with the purpose, which is good, but several sentences are telegraphic fragments ('Joining page markup, browser network results, domain registration and DNS observations, then keeping their change history') and the closing note about unmeasured task-token savings reads as marketing boilerplate. Most sentences carry information, but the prose is choppy and harder to parse than it needs to be.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only inventory tool with no output schema and fully documented parameters, the description covers what is aggregated (markup, network results, domain registration, DNS), that history is retained, and where the evidence is blind. An agent could call this correctly and interpret results cautiously. The main omission is any statement about result volume or how the cursor behaves in practice.

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 100%, so every parameter (id, after cursor, guest_token, events_after) is already documented in the schema. The description adds only a light hint that change history is retained, which loosely corresponds to events_after, but gives no cursor or token semantics of its own. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the weight.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The opening sentence gives a specific verb and resource: read the saved page dependency inventory with HTML/browser evidence. It also implicitly contrasts with a paid 'page-watch' capability that adds continuing checks and change alerts. It stops short of naming the sibling tool (e.g. watch_dependencies) outright, so the differentiation is inferential rather than explicit.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is implied rather than stated: the second sentence signals that continuing source checks and change alerts belong to paid page-watch passes, not this tool. There is no explicit 'use X when' routing, no prerequisites, and no stated when-not-to-use condition.

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

All pageaudit toolsInspect
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