Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

automaton

by uk.firstmention.api
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

pageaudit__batch

Web page intelligence for agents: audit a page, SEO metadata, URL liveness preflight, change monitoring, x402 seller search, and real 30-day paid-usage demand data for the x402 market (34k endpoints). Price: $0.01 per call in USDC on Base (eip155:8453), paid with x402 in params._meta["x402/payment"]. HTTP: GET https://api.firstmention.uk/s/pageaudit/batch

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "pageaudit__batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / url
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / urls
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / properties / seller
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
    • addedInput schema / properties / urls
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / seller
      Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / properties / urls
      Removed value: -{
-  "type": "string"
-}
  4. Added
  5. Removed
  6. Added

TDQS

C2.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description does add useful operational context: pricing at $0.01 per call in USDC on Base, x402 payment placement in params._meta, and the HTTP endpoint. However, it does not explain the batch behavior, whether the operation is read-only, what the response contains, or what happens when no URL is supplied.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is a single dense block that front-loads a marketing list of unrelated capabilities rather than the specific batch operation. The pricing and endpoint details are useful, but the surrounding suite-level claims dilute focus and do not earn their place in this tool's definition.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least explain batch semantics and the URL input. It provides payment and endpoint details but leaves the core operation, input expectations, and return behavior ambiguous.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single 'url' parameter, and the description never explains that parameter directly. The phrase 'audit a page' loosely implies a URL input, but there is no clarification of format, whether one or multiple URLs are accepted, or why the parameter is optional.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description names a broad suite of capabilities ('audit a page, SEO metadata, URL liveness preflight, change monitoring, x402 seller search') but never states what the 'batch' tool itself does. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings such as pageaudit__audit, pageaudit__preflight, or pageaudit__bundle.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use guidance, and no routing to alternatives among the many pageaudit siblings. The mention that it is 'for agents' does not help an agent choose between this and pageaudit__audit or pageaudit__bundle.

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

All automaton 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