Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

domain_wayback_cdx

Retrieves the earliest Wayback Machine CDX sample for each year of a domain using one bounded Internet Archive request, helping trace historical snapshots without bulk queries.

Instructions

Get Wayback CDX year samples. Performs one bounded Internet Archive CDX request and returns the earliest sample per year.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "domain": "<domain>"
    },
    "name": "domain_wayback_cdx"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
domainYesBare DNS hostname

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.20

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose meaningful behavior: exactly one Internet Archive CDX request is made (cost/latency bound) and results are the earliest sample per year rather than the full history. It does not cover rate limits, failure modes, or what a 'sample' record actually contains.

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?

Two short sentences, twenty-odd words, with the action and the sampling semantics front-loaded. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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?

For a one-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is nearly sufficient, but the return shape ('sample' fields such as timestamp, URL, status) is left undefined. That gap matters because no output schema exists to fill it.

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% ('Bare DNS hostname'), so the schema already documents the single parameter. The description adds no format details such as whether a scheme, port, or subdomain is accepted or normalized, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get Wayback CDX year samples') and clarifies the output shape ('earliest sample per year'). It is distinguishable from domain_wayback_availability, but the distinction is only implicit since no sibling is named.

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 words 'bounded' and 'earliest sample per year' imply a lightweight sampling use case, so an agent can infer when this is appropriate. However, there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or routing to the sibling availability tool.

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