Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

skims_sitemap_urls

Retrieve capped SKIMS sitemap URLs from child sitemaps by type, including products, collections, pages, and blogs, with an adjustable limit.

Instructions

List SKIMS sitemap URLs. Returns capped URL entries from SKIMS's (https://skims.com) child sitemaps matching the requested type. The storefront URL is fixed server-side.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoSitemap type. Allowed values: all, products, collections, pages, blogs, agentic_discovery, other
limitNoMaximum URL entries, defaults to 50 and supports up to 250

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.17.5
    • addedInput schema / properties / type / enum
      Added value: +[
+  "all",
+  "products",
+  "collections",
+  "pages",
+  "blogs",
+  "agentic_discovery",
+  "other"
+]
  2. Addedv1.16.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that results are 'capped' and that the storefront URL is 'fixed server-side', which are useful behavioral constraints. However, it does not mention side effects, return format details, pagination, or error behavior, leaving gaps in transparency for a tool with no annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each earns its place: the first states the core action, the second defines output scope, and the third notes a key constraint. Front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: the action, output type (URL entries), cap via limit, type filtering, and a fixed base URL. It does not specify the exact return structure or ordering, but these are minor for this use case and partially inferable from the phrasing.

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 the schema already documents both parameters (type allowed values, limit default/max). The description adds minimal extra meaning—capped entries and type-matching align with schema but do not elaborate on format or value interpretation beyond what schema provides.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List' and the resource 'SKIMS sitemap URLs', and further specifies it returns capped URL entries from child sitemaps filtered by type. It uniquely identifies the tool for SKIMS, distinguishing it from other brand-specific sitemap tools like 'allbirds_sitemap_urls' without ambiguity.

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 usage for SKIMS sitemap URLs by naming the brand and mentions the fixed storefront URL, but it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives or provide exclusions. There is no contrast with sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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