bowrd_scrape_images_from_urlScrape a webpage URL to find images, title, and description using Bowrd's image finder service. Use it to gather visual content and metadata from a page.
Scrape a webpage URL to automatically find images, title, and description using Bowrd's image finder service.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | The webpage URL to scrape for images |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Input schema / $schemaPrevious value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"v1.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
While annotations cover the read-only nature of the call, the description adds valuable operational context by disclosing *what* the tool finds (images, title, description) and *how* it operates (using Bowrd's image finder service). This is information beyond the standard schema/annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The definition is extremely concise, conveying the complete purpose, scope, and mechanism in a single, efficient sentence.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple, read-only scraping operation, it is reasonably complete. By mentioning the output fields (images, title, description), it gives the agent a strong indication of the data it will receive.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema coverage is 100%, setting a baseline of 3. The description reinforces that the URL must be a webpage intended for content scraping, adding minor semantic context beyond the required string type.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the action (Scrape), the resource (webpage URL), and the specific data extracted (images, title, and description). It distinguishes itself by specifying the use of 'Bowrd's image finder service'.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this scraping tool versus the other content management siblings (e.g., bowrd_get_entry or bowrd_list_boards). It does not suggest any preconditions or use cases.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.