Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official

fashionphile_pages

List Fashionphile static pages with pagination and retrieve each page's handle, title, URL, content, and dates; fetch a single page for full content.

Instructions

List Fashionphile static pages. Lists Fashionphile 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. When transport_mode is ssr_embedded, items carry only handle, url and updated_at. Fetch a single page for its full content.

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. Addedv1.17.5

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose useful behavior: default page size (50), max (250), 1-based paging, returned fields, and a notable transport_mode='ssr_embedded' degradation that trims items to handle/url/updated_at. It doesn't mention auth or rate limits, but the return-shape variance is valuable, non-obvious context.

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?

Front-loaded and dense with useful detail, but the opening is redundant – "List Fashionphile static pages" is immediately restated by "Lists Fashionphile static pages." The rest earns its place.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates by naming the returned fields and the reduced field set under ssr_embedded. Pagination and content semantics are covered; only auth/error behavior is unaddressed, which is minor for a read-only list tool.

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 both page (1-based, default 1) and limit (default 50, max 250); the description largely repeats this. It adds no param meaning beyond the schema, and the mentioned transport_mode isn't even a declared parameter, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (Fashionphile static pages), and the final sentence distinguishes it from the singular fashionphile_page sibling for full content. An agent can tell them apart without opening either schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

"Fetch a single page for its full content" gives clear routing context toward the detail tool, and the pagination context implies when to use this listing tool. It doesn't explicitly name which sibling to call or give exclusions, so it stops short of a full 5.

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