Skip to main content
Glama

Read as Markdown

markdown
Read-only

Extract the main readable content of the current page as structured text, removing boilerplate and resolving absolute links for clean article, documentation, and research reading.

Instructions

Extract the main readable content of the current page as Markdown (article/main detection, boilerplate removal, absolute links). Best for articles, docs, and research. Use snapshot instead when you need to interact.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "markdown"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_charsNoDefault 8000.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations only declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description carries most of the burden and does add real behavioral context: boilerplate is stripped, main content is auto-detected, and links are rewritten to absolute form. It stops short of saying what happens on a page with no detectable main content or whether truncation by max_chars is signaled in the output.

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 compact sentences, front-loaded with the core action and output format, followed by use cases and the routing rule. No filler and nothing repeated from structured fields.

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 single-optional-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers what is produced (Markdown, absolute links) and when to prefer it. Only the edge cases — empty extraction results and truncation behavior at the character cap — are left unstated.

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?

The single parameter max_chars is fully documented in the schema (default 8000, positive integer), and the description adds nothing about it. With 100% schema coverage the schema does the work, so the 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 and resource — extract the main readable content of the current page as Markdown — and immediately parenthesizes the mechanism (article/main detection, boilerplate removal, absolute links), so the agent knows exactly what transformation happens. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like extract or snapshot.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Gives an affirmative use case ("Best for articles, docs, and research") and an explicit exclusion routing to a named alternative ("Use snapshot instead when you need to interact"). The selection condition between the two tools is unambiguous.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.