anew

Read a page (anew.page URL → its HTML source)

anew_read

Pass an anew.page URL, get back the HTML document encoded in it, plus its canonical URL and byte size. (Two in-page tools share this name and take no arguments: the editor's reads the document open in the editor, and a rendered page's reads the page being viewed. This one takes a url and reads that page.) To revise an existing anew page, its URL is its source: read it, edit that HTML, write it again. The new URL is a separate page and the original keeps working. Read returns the author's exact bytes — no anew-injected tags, no proxied image srcs — so it re-encodes byte-for-byte. Never re-author from a rendered page, a scraped DOM, or a screenshot: each loses the author's markup, and none is faster than reading the slug. Decoding is local and exact, so any anew URL reads — the page needs no prior visit and no fetch.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	An anew.page URL, or a bare slug. Subdomain, cosmetic-prefix and #hash forms all resolve.
`format`	No	How the document rides back. "text" (default) is one plain text block. "resource" is one embedded-resource block ({type:"resource"}, mimeType text/html) — the typed MCP form for callers that want the page tagged as HTML rather than loose text. Same bytes both ways.	text

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	Canonical anew.page URL for this document.
`bytes`	Yes	Encoded URL length in bytes.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedSep 14, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / limit

Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Unfurl-safe URL threshold (4000); headroom = limit - bytes. Past it the URL still works (hard ceiling 65000), it may just break in some apps.",
-  "type": "integer"
-}

changedOutput schema / required

Previous value: -[
-  "url",
-  "bytes",
-  "limit"
-]New value: +[
+  "url",
+  "bytes"
+]

First observedSep 1, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the full burden, and it delivers: it discloses exact-byte return, absence of injected tags or proxied image srcs, local and exact decoding, no fetch or prior visit required, and that the original page keeps working. These are meaningful behavioral traits beyond the schema.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and every subsequent sentence adds value: disambiguation, workflow guidance, byte-exactness, anti-pattern warning, and local decoding. Nothing is redundant despite the length.

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?

For a two-parameter tool with a complete schema and output schema, the description covers disambiguation, return semantics, usage prohibitions, and underlying behavior. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds some context about the URL being an anew.page URL and the output format, but it mostly restates what the schema already documents rather than enriching parameter meaning.

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?

The description opens with a precise statement: pass an anew.page URL, receive the HTML document, canonical URL, and byte size. It also disambiguates from same-named in-page tools and from the sibling anew_write, so an agent can tell exactly what this tool does.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly gives the read-write workflow (read, edit HTML, write again), warns against re-authoring from rendered pages/scraped DOMs/screenshots, and clarifies that reading the slug is always the correct path. It names exclusions and describes when not to use alternatives.

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

All anew 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.