Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

brand_retrieve

Retrieve brand data by domain to get a profile with title, description, brand colors, logos, icons, social links, and schema.org organization details.

Instructions

Retrieve brand data by domain. Returns a brand profile for a domain (title, description, brand colors as hex, logos and icons ranked best-first, backdrops, socials, links, and any schema.org organization data). Enrichment-only fields that are not present in the page markup are returned as null.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesDomain to retrieve brand data for, e.g. context.dev
maxAgeMsNoCache freshness window in milliseconds, clamps to 1 day..1 year
maxSpeedNoOptimize for speed by skipping schema.org and footer-link extraction
timeoutMSNoUpstream fetch timeout in milliseconds, clamps to 1000..300000
force_languageNoAccepted for compatibility; not applied in HTML-only mode

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0
  2. Removedv1.6.0
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral burden. It clearly implies a read-only retrieval and usefully discloses that enrichment-only fields absent from markup are returned as null, but it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or caching semantics beyond what the schema already says.

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 two tight sentences and front-loads the core operation. The second sentence adds return-value context without wasting space.

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

Completeness4/5

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

There is no output schema, so the description appropriately lists the returned fields and null behavior. It is nearly complete, though it omits when-to-use routing guidance that would matter in this large sibling set.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters. The description reinforces that the tool is domain-driven but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema, making baseline 3 appropriate.

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 uses a clear verb and resource: retrieve brand data by domain. It also enumerates the returned brand profile fields. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from adjacent web-scraping or page-retrieval siblings, so it falls short of a 5.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, alternatives, or exclusions. It only implies usage from 'by domain' and does not help an agent decide between this and web_scrape or other entity-retrieval tools.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools