MCP Fetch
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Server capabilities have not been inspected yet.
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| fetchA | Retrieves URLs from the Internet and extracts their content as markdown. If images are found, they are merged vertically (max 6 images per group, max height 8000px, max size 30MB per group) and copied to the clipboard of the user's host machine. You will need to paste (Cmd+V) to insert the images. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools, as there are no other tools to compare it to. The single tool 'fetch' has a clear and distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.
A single tool inherently has perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tool names to compare it against. The name 'fetch' follows a simple verb pattern, which is appropriate for its function, and there is no inconsistency in naming conventions.
A single tool is generally too few for most server purposes, as it limits functionality and may indicate an incomplete or overly narrow scope. For a server named 'MCP Fetch', which suggests fetching-related operations, having only one tool feels thin and insufficient for covering potential variations or related tasks in the domain.
The server's domain appears to be fetching and processing web content, but with only one tool, there are significant gaps in coverage. For example, there are no tools for handling different fetch methods, error handling, caching, or other related operations, which could lead to agent failures when more complex fetching scenarios arise.