Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

physorg_article

Extract Phys.org article metadata and readable body paragraphs from a canonical dated news URL, with browser rendering fallback for challenged HTTP requests.

Instructions

Get a Phys.org article. Returns public Phys.org article metadata and readable body paragraphs from a canonical dated news URL. The service tries proxied HTTP first and uses the production browser fleet when the article edge challenges HTTP. Billing is 2 credits for an HTTP-profile success and 10 credits when browser rendering is required. No author-profile route was verified.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesCanonical Phys.org article URL

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.9

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses the HTTP-first-then-browser-fleet fallback, the credit cost asymmetry (2 vs 10 credits depending on rendering path), and the service-side constraint that only public articles are served. Auth requirements and error/timeout behavior are not covered, keeping it below 5.

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 with purpose and return shape in the first two sentences, then behavior and cost. Four sentences, each carrying distinct information; the billing sentence is long but earns its place since cost varies 5x by path.

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?

A single-parameter fetch tool with no output schema and no annotations. The description covers what is returned, how retrieval is attempted, and the cost model, which is enough for an agent to call it correctly; only permission/error semantics are missing.

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% for the single url parameter, so baseline is 3. The description adds marginal nuance by specifying 'canonical dated news URL', reinforcing the schema's 'Canonical Phys.org article URL', but supplies no format example or rejection conditions.

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 a Phys.org article') and defines the return payload (metadata plus readable body paragraphs from a canonical dated news URL). It contrasts itself against siblings only obliquely, via the note that no author-profile route was verified, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 description implies the use case (fetch full article body from a canonical URL) versus the physorg_headlines/news/sections siblings, but never states when to use this tool or when not to. No explicit alternative routing is provided.

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