Skip to main content
Glama
123Ergo

unphurl-mcp

check_url

Analyze URLs for security risks and data quality across seven dimensions including redirect behavior, domain intelligence, SSL/TLS validity, and structural analysis. Returns a risk score with detailed signal breakdown to help assess URL safety.

Instructions

Check a single URL for security and data quality signals. Returns a risk score (0-100), detailed signal breakdown, and metadata.

Unphurl analyses URLs across seven dimensions: redirect behaviour, brand impersonation, domain intelligence (age, registrar, expiration, status codes, nameservers via RDAP), SSL/TLS validity, parked domain detection, URL structural analysis (length, path depth, subdomain count, entropy), and DNS enrichment (MX records). The score is calculated from these signals using either default weights or a custom scoring profile.

Higher scores mean more suspicious. The score is a signal, not a verdict. You decide the threshold based on the use case.

Billing: Most lookups are free. Known domains (Tranco Top 100K like google.com, github.com) return instantly with score 0 at no cost. Previously analysed domains return cached signals at no cost. Only unknown domains that run through the full analysis pipeline cost 1 pipeline check credit. The response's meta.pipeline_check_charged field tells you whether this check consumed a credit.

Use the "profile" parameter to score results with custom weights. For example, a "cold-email" profile might weight parked domains heavily while ignoring brand impersonation. Use list_profiles to see available profiles, or show_defaults to see all signal weights.

If the account has zero credits and the URL requires a full pipeline check, returns a 402 error with a link to purchase more credits.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe URL to check (must be http:// or https://)
profileNoName of a custom scoring profile to use (optional). If omitted, default weights are used.
Behavior5/5

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It thoroughly explains the tool's behavior: it returns a risk score with detailed breakdowns, describes the seven analysis dimensions, clarifies that higher scores mean more suspicious (but are not verdicts), details billing (free for known/cached domains, costs credits for unknown domains), and outlines error handling (402 error). This covers critical aspects like output format, cost implications, and operational constraints.

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 well-structured and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose and outputs. Each sentence adds valuable information, such as analysis dimensions, scoring interpretation, billing details, and parameter usage. While it is detailed, the information is necessary given the tool's complexity and lack of annotations, so it avoids redundancy. A slight deduction is made as it could be slightly more concise in the middle sections without losing clarity.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (multiple analysis dimensions, billing logic, parameter usage) and the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is highly complete. It covers purpose, usage, behavior, parameters, billing, and error handling comprehensively. The lack of output schema is compensated by explaining the return values (risk score, signal breakdown, metadata), making it sufficient for an agent to understand and use the tool effectively.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value beyond the schema by explaining the 'profile' parameter in detail: it describes how custom weights affect scoring, gives an example ('cold-email' profile), and references other tools ('list_profiles', 'show_defaults') for further context. However, it does not provide additional semantics for the 'url' parameter beyond what the schema states, keeping it from a perfect score.

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's purpose: 'Check a single URL for security and data quality signals.' It specifies the exact action (check) and resource (URL), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'check_urls' (plural) or 'check_history' (historical checks). The description elaborates on what the check entails, making the purpose highly specific and unambiguous.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions using 'list_profiles' to see available profiles and 'show_defaults' to see signal weights, indicating related tools for configuration. It also explains billing implications (e.g., free vs. paid checks) and error conditions (402 error for insufficient credits), helping users decide when to invoke it based on account status and URL type.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/123Ergo/unphurl-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server