Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

everlane_pages

List Everlane static pages with pagination, returning handle, title, URL, content, and dates. Fallback mode returns limited fields.

Instructions

List Everlane static pages. Lists Everlane static pages, 50 per page by default (limit, max 250), with page starting at 1. Each page has its handle, title, URL, plain-text content, and created, updated and published dates. In a fallback mode flagged by transport_mode: "ssr_embedded", items carry only handle, url and updated_at.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo1-based page, defaults to 1
limitNoMaximum static pages, defaults to 50 and supports up to 250

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.16.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses pagination defaults (50, max 250), 1-based paging, the returned field set, and a meaningful fallback mode ('ssr_embedded') where items degrade to handle/url/updated_at. It omits read-only safety framing, but the listing nature is self-evident.

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?

Dense and front-loaded, with paging and fallback details packed efficiently. Minor waste in the first sentence ('List Everlane static pages.') being immediately restated as 'Lists Everlane static pages, 50 per page...', which is a small redundancy rather than a real cost.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description must cover returns – and it lists the page fields (handle, title, URL, plain-text content, dates) plus the reduced-field fallback mode. That is sufficient for a two-parameter list tool, though a note on total counts or how to detect the fallback would tighten 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% and the schema already documents both `page` (1-based, default 1) and `limit` (default 50, max 250). The description largely restates these, adding no syntax or semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline 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+resource ('List Everlane static pages') that distinguishes it from the singular sibling everlane_page. Sibling differentiation is implicit in the plural naming rather than called out explicitly, 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?

No statement of when to use this versus everlane_page, everlane_collection_products, or everlane_sitemap_urls. The agent gets no explicit context or exclusions, only the tool's own scope.

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