Skip to main content
Glama
DumbGreenFish

greenfish-webtools-mcp

by DumbGreenFish
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
Python
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.1.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: fetch_url retrieves content from a known URL, while websearch performs a search query. There is no overlap or ambiguity.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern in snake_case: fetch_url and websearch (where 'web' is the noun and 'search' is the verb).

    Tool Count4/5

    With only 2 tools, the server is minimal but still reasonable for a basic web tools utility. It covers the essential functions of searching and fetching, though additional tools like list search results could be useful.

    Completeness4/5

    The server covers the basic web access workflow: search to find URLs, then fetch to read content. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no pagination or result filtering), but core functionality is present.

  • Average 4.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 12 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • No stable releases found
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under GPL 3.0.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior3/5

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

    Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds minor context about not requiring API keys, but does not go beyond what annotations imply. No contradictions.

    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?

    The description is reasonably concise at five lines, including an example. However, there is some redundancy (e.g., 'Performs a web search' and 'allows searching the live web'), and the structure could be tightened without losing clarity.

    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?

    The description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral context (no API keys). With an output schema presumably present, it does not need to detail return values. It could be more complete by explicitly contrasting with 'fetch_url' or listing limitations, but overall it's adequate.

    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 input schema provides detailed descriptions for all five parameters, so baseline is 3. The description does not add additional meaning or context about parameters beyond what the schema already 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 tool performs a web search and returns results, specifying it searches the live web for current information. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'fetch_url' by being a search rather than a URL fetch, and provides concrete examples of use cases (news, documentation, facts).

    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?

    The description gives clear context for when to use the tool (retrieving news, documentation, general facts) and includes an example (recent events, technical documentation). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or compare with the sibling 'fetch_url', missing an opportunity for clearer guidance.

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

  • Behavior4/5

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

    Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. Description adds that content is stripped of navigation and boilerplate, beyond annotations. No contradictions.

    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?

    Two sentences: first explains what the tool does, second gives usage guidance. No wasteful words, front-loaded with key information.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness5/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    For a simple read-only tool with an output schema and two well-described parameters, the description covers purpose, usage, and behavior adequately. No missing critical details.

    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 input schema already provides clear descriptions for both 'url' and 'max_chars' parameters, so the description adds minimal parameter-specific value but does clarify the output quality (stripped content). Baseline 3.

    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 it fetches a web page and returns main readable content, stripping boilerplate. It distinguishes from sibling 'websearch' by specifying 'when you already have its URL'.

    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?

    Explicitly says to use this tool for reading a specific article or documentation page when you have the URL, implying not for search (which is the sibling tool's role).

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

GreenFishWebtoolsMCP MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

GreenFishWebtoolsMCP MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/DumbGreenFish/GreenFishWebtoolsMCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server