Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
Msparihar

MCP Server Firecrawl

by Msparihar
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Firecrawl MCP サーバー

Firecrawl API を使用して Web スクレイピング、コンテンツ検索、サイト クロール、およびデータ抽出を行うための Model Context Protocol (MCP) サーバー。

特徴

  • Webスクレイピング: カスタマイズ可能なオプションを使用して、任意のWebページからコンテンツを抽出します

    • モバイルデバイスのエミュレーション

    • 広告とポップアップのブロック

    • コンテンツフィルタリング

    • 構造化データ抽出

    • 複数の出力形式

  • コンテンツ検索：インテリジェントな検索機能

    • 多言語サポート

    • 位置情報に基づく結果

    • カスタマイズ可能な結果制限

    • 構造化された出力形式

  • サイトクロール：高度なウェブクロール機能

    • 深度制御

    • パスフィルタリング

    • レート制限

    • 進捗状況の追跡

    • サイトマップの統合

  • サイトマッピング: サイト構造マップを生成する

    • サブドメインのサポート

    • 検索フィルタリング

    • リンク分析

    • 視覚的な階層

  • データ抽出: 複数の URL から構造化データを抽出します

    • スキーマ検証

    • バッチ処理

    • ウェブ検索の強化

    • カスタム抽出プロンプト

Related MCP server: MCP Firecrawl Server

インストール

# Global installation
npm install -g @modelcontextprotocol/mcp-server-firecrawl

# Local project installation
npm install @modelcontextprotocol/mcp-server-firecrawl

クイックスタート

  1. 開発者ポータルからFirecrawl APIキーを取得します

  2. API キーを設定します:

    Unix/Linux/macOS (bash/zsh):

    export FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=your-api-key

    Windows (コマンドプロンプト):

    set FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=your-api-key

    Windows (PowerShell):

    $env:FIRECRAWL_API_KEY = "your-api-key"

    代替案: .env ファイルの使用 (開発に推奨):

    # Install dotenv
npm install dotenv

# Create .env file
echo "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=your-api-key" > .env

    次にコード内で次の操作を行います。

    import dotenv from 'dotenv';
dotenv.config();

  3. サーバーを実行します。

    mcp-server-firecrawl

統合

クロードデスクトップアプリ

MCP 設定に追加:

{
  "firecrawl": {
    "command": "mcp-server-firecrawl",
    "env": {
      "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "your-api-key"
    }
  }
}

クロード VSCode 拡張機能

MCP 構成に追加:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "firecrawl": {
      "command": "mcp-server-firecrawl",
      "env": {
        "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "your-api-key"
      }
    }
  }
}

使用例

ウェブスクレイピング

// Basic scraping
{
  name: "scrape_url",
  arguments: {
    url: "https://example.com",
    formats: ["markdown"],
    onlyMainContent: true
  }
}

// Advanced extraction
{
  name: "scrape_url",
  arguments: {
    url: "https://example.com/blog",
    jsonOptions: {
      prompt: "Extract article content",
      schema: {
        title: "string",
        content: "string"
      }
    },
    mobile: true,
    blockAds: true
  }
}

サイトクロール

// Basic crawling
{
  name: "crawl",
  arguments: {
    url: "https://example.com",
    maxDepth: 2,
    limit: 100
  }
}

// Advanced crawling
{
  name: "crawl",
  arguments: {
    url: "https://example.com",
    maxDepth: 3,
    includePaths: ["/blog", "/products"],
    excludePaths: ["/admin"],
    ignoreQueryParameters: true
  }
}

サイトマッピング

// Generate site map
{
  name: "map",
  arguments: {
    url: "https://example.com",
    includeSubdomains: true,
    limit: 1000
  }
}

データ抽出

// Extract structured data
{
  name: "extract",
  arguments: {
    urls: ["https://example.com/product1", "https://example.com/product2"],
    prompt: "Extract product details",
    schema: {
      name: "string",
      price: "number",
      description: "string"
    }
  }
}

構成

詳細なセットアップ オプションについては、構成ガイドを参照してください。

APIドキュメント

エンドポイントの詳細な仕様については、 API ドキュメントを参照してください。

発達

# Install dependencies
npm install

# Build
npm run build

# Run tests
npm test

# Start in development mode
npm run dev

例

さらなる使用例については、例のディレクトリを確認してください。

エラー処理

サーバーは堅牢なエラー処理を実装しています。

  • 指数バックオフによるレート制限

  • 自動再試行

  • 詳細なエラーメッセージ

  • デバッグログ

安全

  • APIキーの保護

  • リクエストの検証

  • ドメイン許可リスト

  • レート制限

  • 安全なエラーメッセージ

貢献

貢献ガイドラインについてはCONTRIBUTING.md を参照してください。

ライセンス

MIT ライセンス - 詳細についてはライセンスを参照してください。

Available Tools

2 tools
extractC

Extracts structured data from URLs

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYesURLs to extract from
promptNoExtraction guidance prompt
schemaNoData structure schema
ignoreSitemapNoIgnore sitemap.xml during processing
enableWebSearchNoUse web search for additional data
includeSubdomainsNoInclude subdomains in processing

TDQS

C2.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention network requests, rate limits, authentication, error handling, or whether it is idempotent. Only states 'extracts', which is vague.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Very short at 7 words, but under-specified. Lacks structure such as sections or examples. Conciseness would be appropriate if complete, but here it is insufficient.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the complexity (6 parameters, nested objects, sibling tools, no output schema), the description is extremely incomplete. No information on return format, usage patterns, or edge cases.

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 baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions. No elaboration on how parameters interact.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool extracts structured data from URLs, but does not differentiate from sibling 'map'. The verb and resource are clear, but the scope is vague as 'structured data' is not defined.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'map', no prerequisites or exclusions provided. The description is insufficient for an agent to decide usage context.

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

mapC

Maps a website's structure

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesBase URL to map
limitNoMaximum links to return
searchNoSearch query for mapping
timeoutNoRequest timeout
sitemapOnlyNoOnly use sitemap.xml for mapping
ignoreSitemapNoIgnore sitemap.xml during mapping
includeSubdomainsNoInclude subdomains in mapping

TDQS

C2.4/5.0
Behavior1/5

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

No annotations are present, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Maps a website's structure' with no details on whether it crawls, destructiveness, rate limits, or return format. This is insufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, short sentence, which is efficient but under-specified for a tool with 7 parameters. It could include key details without sacrificing conciseness.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (7 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description lacks essential context such as return values, process details, or limitations. It is highly incomplete.

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 has 100% description coverage for all 7 parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, making it adequate but not improved.

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?

The description states a specific verb ('Maps') and resource ('a website's structure'), making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'extract', which could lead to ambiguity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'extract'). The description lacks context for selection or prerequisites.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 2 tool updatesv1.0.1
    • First observedextract
    • First observedmap
Deploy Server
Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Scored across 2 tools

Disambiguation5/5

The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: one extracts structured data from URLs, the other maps a website's structure. There is no overlap in functionality.

Naming Consistency5/5

Both tool names are single imperative verbs ('extract' and 'map'), following a consistent and concise naming pattern.

Tool Count3/5

With only 2 tools, the server is on the lower end of acceptable scope. It covers basic functionality but feels minimal for a web crawling service.

Completeness3/5

The server provides core data extraction and site mapping, but lacks advanced features like recursive crawling or search, which are notable gaps for the domain.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • MCP Firecrawl Server

    codyde
    F
    license
    D
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A server that provides tools to scrape websites and extract structured data from them using Firecrawl's APIs, supporting both basic website scraping in multiple formats and custom schema-based data extraction.
    2
    3
    -

  • Firecrawl MCP Server

    ampcome-mcps
    A
    license
    A
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    A Model Context Protocol server that enables web scraping, crawling, and content extraction capabilities through integration with Firecrawl.
    8
    117,089 npm
    2
    MIT

Appeared in Searches