Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
adhistory-mcp

adhistory-mcp

by OBrandon
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Broken link checker

broken_links
Read-onlyIdempotent

Crawl a site from start URLs and check every link, image and script for errors. Returns only broken links and problems by default, with HTTP status and the pages where each was found.

Instructions

Crawl a website from start URLs and check every link, image and script it finds. Each item: link URL, HTTP status, result (ok / broken / blocked, where blocked means the site refused automated checks), error, final URL after redirects, response time, internal or external, anchor text and the pages it was found on. By default only problems are returned. Cost: $1.00 per 1,000 result rows on the user's Apify account (with only_broken, working links are not charged). Latency: usually 20-120 s depending on site size.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "start_urls": "<start_urls>"
    },
    "name": "broken_links"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
max_depthNoHow many links deep to follow. 0 = start pages only.
max_linksNoUpper limit of distinct links checked.
max_pagesNoHow many pages of the site to open and read for links.
start_urlsYesPages to start crawling from.
only_brokenNoReturn only broken links and problems, not working links.
check_externalNoAlso check links to other websites (checked, not crawled).
check_images_and_scriptsNoAlso check images, scripts, stylesheets and icons.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent and non-destructive semantics, yet the description still adds substantial context: the result taxonomy (ok/broken/blocked, with blocked meaning the site refused automated checks), the default filter, the billing model on the user's Apify account including that working links are not charged under only_broken, and the 20-120 s latency band. These are exactly the side-effect and cost facts an agent cannot get from structured fields.

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?

Front-loaded with the action, then return fields, then defaults, then cost and latency — a sensible ordering for an agent deciding whether to call. Dense but every sentence carries information; no filler.

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?

The tool is a moderately complex crawler, but annotations plus an output schema plus full parameter documentation carry most of the burden. The description fills the remaining gaps that structured data cannot express: result status semantics, default filtering, billing and expected latency.

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 every parameter's meaning is already documented in the schema itself. The description only adds the billing consequence of only_broken, and says nothing about max_depth, max_links, max_pages, check_external or check_images_and_scripts beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 — crawl a site from start URLs and check every link, image and script — and enumerates the reported fields. No sibling tool in the catalog performs link auditing, so the agent can distinguish it immediately.

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 a clear operating context: default behavior returns only problems, cost is per 1,000 result rows, and runtime is typically 20-120 s. It does not state explicit exclusions or name when an agent should pick a different approach, but the cost/latency lines give the agent the information needed to decide whether the call is affordable.

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