Skip to main content
Glama
mcma123

Firecrawl MCP Server

by mcma123

firecrawl_map

Discover and extract URLs from websites using sitemap.xml or HTML link analysis. Start with a URL to map site structure and find relevant pages.

Instructions

Discover URLs from a starting point. Can use both sitemap.xml and HTML link discovery.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesStarting URL for URL discovery
searchNoOptional search term to filter URLs
ignoreSitemapNoSkip sitemap.xml discovery and only use HTML links
sitemapOnlyNoOnly use sitemap.xml for discovery, ignore HTML links
includeSubdomainsNoInclude URLs from subdomains in results
limitNoMaximum number of URLs to return

Implementation Reference

  • The handler executes the firecrawl_map tool by validating input with isMapOptions, destructuring arguments, calling the Firecrawl client's mapUrl method, handling errors, and returning the discovered URLs as text content.
    case 'firecrawl_map': {
      if (!isMapOptions(args)) {
        throw new Error('Invalid arguments for firecrawl_map');
      }
      const { url, ...options } = args;
      const response = await client.mapUrl(url, options);
      if ('error' in response) {
        throw new Error(response.error);
      }
      if (!response.links) {
        throw new Error('No links received from FireCrawl API');
      }
      return {
        content: [{ type: 'text', text: response.links.join('\n') }],
        isError: false,
      };
    }
  • The Tool object definition including name, description, and detailed inputSchema for validating firecrawl_map parameters.
    const MAP_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'firecrawl_map',
      description:
        'Discover URLs from a starting point. Can use both sitemap.xml and HTML link discovery.',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          url: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Starting URL for URL discovery',
          },
          search: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'Optional search term to filter URLs',
          },
          ignoreSitemap: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: 'Skip sitemap.xml discovery and only use HTML links',
          },
          sitemapOnly: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: 'Only use sitemap.xml for discovery, ignore HTML links',
          },
          includeSubdomains: {
            type: 'boolean',
            description: 'Include URLs from subdomains in results',
          },
          limit: {
            type: 'number',
            description: 'Maximum number of URLs to return',
          },
        },
        required: ['url'],
      },
    };
  • src/index.ts:863-873 (registration)
    Registration of the firecrawl_map tool (as MAP_TOOL) in the array of available tools served by the ListToolsRequestSchema handler.
    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,
    ],
  • Helper type guard function used to validate if the provided arguments match the expected MapParams shape for firecrawl_map.
    function isMapOptions(args: unknown): args is MapParams & { url: string } {
      return (
        typeof args === 'object' &&
        args !== null &&
        'url' in args &&
        typeof (args as { url: unknown }).url === 'string'
      );
    }
Behavior2/5

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 mentions discovery methods but lacks critical behavioral details: whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication needs, output format, or error handling. For a tool with 6 parameters and no annotations, this is inadequate.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or vague language. It efficiently communicates the essential functionality without unnecessary elaboration.

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?

Given 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns (e.g., list of URLs, structured data), error conditions, or performance characteristics. For a discovery tool with potential complexity, more context is needed to guide effective use.

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 schema fully documents all 6 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond implying discovery methods (sitemap.xml and HTML links), which aligns with parameters like ignoreSitemap and sitemapOnly. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 tool's purpose: 'Discover URLs from a starting point' with specific methods ('sitemap.xml and HTML link discovery'). It uses a clear verb ('Discover') and resource ('URLs'), but doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like firecrawl_crawl or firecrawl_search, which might have overlapping functionality.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions the methods (sitemap.xml and HTML links) but doesn't specify scenarios, prerequisites, or exclusions. Given multiple sibling tools (e.g., firecrawl_crawl, firecrawl_search), this lack of comparative context is a significant gap.

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