Skip to main content
Glama

apex-x1

by xyz.apexfaucet
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

page_extract

Render any public web page in a real headless Chrome and return its text. JavaScript runs first, so docs sites and single-page apps that a plain fetch returns empty come back complete. $0.009 per call (x402 on Arc/Base/Solana/X1): the full text and every outbound link. Without a payment the call returns the price and every rail we accept. Refuses private and reserved addresses and our own hosts, so it cannot be used as a proxy into a network. Sites that put a bot wall in front of their pages (Cloudflare, DataDome and the like) answer with a challenge rather than the page: the call then FAILS with http-403 or bot-challenge and says so, rather than charging you for a spinner.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesthe http(s) page to render
fullNotrue asks for the paid full text. Without a payment you get a 402 carrying the price and every rail we accept; sign it and call again with `payment`.
paymentNoa signed x402 payment (the same base64 payload you would put in the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header). Pass it here and the purchase completes inside this tool call - you never have to leave MCP.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / full / description
      Previous value: -"true asks for the paid full text; you will get a 402 with payment options"New value: +"true asks for the paid full text. Without a payment you get a 402 carrying the price and every rail we accept; sign it and call again with `payment`."
    • addedInput schema / properties / payment
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "a signed x402 payment (the same base64 payload you would put in the PAYMENT-SIGNATURE header). Pass it here and the purchase completes inside this tool call - you never have to leave MCP.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pricing and payment requirements, security restrictions (refuses private/reserved addresses and own hosts), bot-wall failure modes with specific error codes (http-403, bot-challenge), and the fact that it only charges on success. This is exceptionally transparent.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is detailed but each sentence adds value: purpose, JS behavior, pricing, security, failure modes. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and structured logically. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers return values (full text and outbound links, or price and rails, or error codes), payment requirements, security constraints, and failure behavior. All three parameters are explained with usage context. It is complete for an agent to call correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful context: it explains the behavior of the 'full' parameter (paid vs free 402 response) and the 'payment' parameter (signed x402 flow that completes inside the tool call). It clarifies the purchase flow beyond the schema's terse descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool renders any public web page with headless Chrome and returns its text, with JavaScript execution. It distinguishes itself from a plain fetch by highlighting JS rendering. Though it doesn't explicitly reference the sibling site_extract, the purpose is unambiguous and specific.

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?

It provides context for when to use the tool (JS-rendered pages that plain fetch can't get) and mentions bot-wall failures, but it never mentions the sibling site_extract or gives explicit exclusions. No alternative tool is suggested, so an agent has no guidance on when to choose this over the sibling.

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

All apex-x1 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