Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

gymshark_pages

List Gymshark static pages via Crawlora MCP with pagination (50 per page, up to 250) to retrieve handles, titles, URLs, text content, and timestamps for content indexing.

Instructions

List Gymshark static pages. Lists Gymshark static pages, 50 per page by default (limit up to 250) with a 1-based page. Each has its handle, title, URL, plain-text content and timestamps. When transport_mode is 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 burden well: it discloses default page size (50), max limit (250), 1-based pagination, the fields returned per item, and a conditional payload reduction when transport_mode is ssr_embedded. The only flaw is that transport_mode is not present in the input schema, which could confuse an agent about how to trigger that behavior.

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?

Efficient and front-loaded overall, though the first two clauses redundantly restate 'List Gymshark static pages.' Every subsequent sentence (pagination bounds, field list, transport-mode caveat) 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, the description correctly compensates by enumerating returned fields (handle, title, URL, content, timestamps) and the reduced set for the ssr_embedded case. The dangling reference to a transport_mode parameter that does not exist in the schema is the main completeness gap.

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 page and limit are already documented. The description largely repeats those defaults and bounds rather than adding new meaning, which meets the baseline of 3 for high-coverage schemas.

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 ('List') and resource ('Gymshark static pages'), making the collection scope unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the singular sibling gymshark_page, so the agent must infer that this one enumerates rather than fetches one page.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not guidance, and no reference to the many siblings (gymshark_page, gymshark_sitemaps, gymshark_collections). Usage is only implied by the pagination mechanics, leaving the agent to guess when this is preferable to alternatives.

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