Skip to main content
Glama
mcma123

Firecrawl MCP Server

by mcma123

firecrawl_check_batch_status

Monitor the progress and results of a web scraping batch job by providing its ID to track completion status and retrieve extracted data.

Instructions

Check the status of a batch scraping job.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesBatch job ID to check

Implementation Reference

  • Handler logic for the firecrawl_check_batch_status tool. Checks the status of a batch scraping operation by looking up the operation ID in the batchOperations map and returns formatted status information.
          case 'firecrawl_check_batch_status': {
            if (!isStatusCheckOptions(args)) {
              throw new Error(
                'Invalid arguments for firecrawl_check_batch_status'
              );
            }
    
            const operation = batchOperations.get(args.id);
            if (!operation) {
              return {
                content: [
                  {
                    type: 'text',
                    text: `No batch operation found with ID: ${args.id}`,
                  },
                ],
                isError: true,
              };
            }
    
            const status = `Batch Status:
    Status: ${operation.status}
    Progress: ${operation.progress.completed}/${operation.progress.total}
    ${operation.error ? `Error: ${operation.error}` : ''}
    ${
      operation.result
        ? `Results: ${JSON.stringify(operation.result, null, 2)}`
        : ''
    }`;
    
            return {
              content: [{ type: 'text', text: status }],
              isError: false,
            };
          }
  • Tool schema definition including name, description, and input schema requiring a batch job ID.
    const CHECK_BATCH_STATUS_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'firecrawl_check_batch_status',
      description: 'Check the status of a batch scraping job.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          id: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Batch job ID to check',
          },
        },
        required: ['id'],
      },
    };
  • src/index.ts:862-874 (registration)
    Registration of all tools including CHECK_BATCH_STATUS_TOOL in the ListToolsRequest handler.
    server.setRequestHandler(ListToolsRequestSchema, async () => ({
      tools: [
        SCRAPE_TOOL,
        MAP_TOOL,
        CRAWL_TOOL,
        BATCH_SCRAPE_TOOL,
        CHECK_BATCH_STATUS_TOOL,
        CHECK_CRAWL_STATUS_TOOL,
        SEARCH_TOOL,
        EXTRACT_TOOL,
        DEEP_RESEARCH_TOOL,
      ],
    }));
  • Type guard helper function to validate input arguments for status check tools.
    function isStatusCheckOptions(args: unknown): args is StatusCheckOptions {
      return (
        typeof args === 'object' &&
        args !== null &&
        'id' in args &&
        typeof (args as { id: unknown }).id === 'string'
      );
    }
  • Type interface for status check options used by the handler.
    interface StatusCheckOptions {
      id: string;
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool checks status but doesn't describe what the status response includes (e.g., progress, errors, completion), whether it's idempotent, or any rate limits. For a status-checking tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior beyond the basic purpose.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every part of the sentence earns its place by conveying essential information, achieving optimal conciseness.

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

Completeness3/5

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

Given the tool's low complexity (single parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavioral aspects like response format or error handling. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should do more to compensate, but it meets the minimum for a simple status-check tool, leaving room for improvement in completeness.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'id' clearly documented as 'Batch job ID to check.' The description doesn't add any additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or source context. Given the high schema coverage, a baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the schema adequately handles parameter semantics without extra description value.

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 description clearly states the action ('check the status') and resource ('batch scraping job'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes this tool from other status-checking siblings like 'firecrawl_check_crawl_status' by specifying it's for batch jobs rather than crawl jobs. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with all possible alternatives, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

The description implies usage context by specifying 'batch scraping job,' suggesting this should be used after initiating a batch job. However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'firecrawl_check_crawl_status' or provide guidance on prerequisites (e.g., needing a job ID from 'firecrawl_batch_scrape'). The usage is clear but lacks explicit alternatives or exclusions.

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/mcma123/firecrawl-mcp-server'

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