Skip to main content
Glama

monitor

Track a URL over time and report meaningful content changes. Check current status, view change history, or stop tracking—optionally scoped to a CSS selector to reduce false positives.

Instructions

Track a URL over time and report meaningful content changes.

Use when the user wants to watch a page for updates (price changes, new blog posts, status updates). Ask me to 'set up monitoring for ' for a guided setup playbook.

Args: url: target URL. action: "check" | "history" | "forget". prefer: ladder preference, same as scrape. css_selector: scope the diff to one element (so banner / nav changes don't trigger false positives).

Snapshots persist under PYRECRAWL_MONITOR_DIR (default ~/.pyrecrawl/monitors/). check returns status of new | unchanged | changed | error and a unified diff when the page changed.

Returns: {url, status: "new"|"unchanged"|"changed"|"error", diff?: str, snapshot_chars?: int, elapsed_ms?: int}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
actionNocheck
preferNoauto
css_selectorNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.7.1

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it delivers by disclosing that snapshots persist under PYRECRAWL_MONITOR_DIR, that check returns status values including error, and that a unified diff is produced. It could go further by explaining the side effects of 'forget' and retention behavior, but the core stateful behavior is well disclosed.

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 well-structured with a purpose statement, explicit usage trigger, Args block, and Returns block. It is longer than minimal but each section earns its place; the guided-setup sentence adds a useful interaction hint rather than filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a stateful tool with three actions, the description details only 'check' behavior. 'history' and 'forget' are listed but their effects, return shapes, and side effects are unexplained. Since there are no annotations and schema coverage is 0%, this is a meaningful gap for an agent deciding how to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains url, enumerates action values, gives css_selector its diff-scoping purpose, and references the 'prefer' ladder via scrape. The main gap is that 'history' and 'forget' semantics are not expanded, and 'prefer' relies on knowing what scrape does.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Track a URL over time and report meaningful content changes.' This clearly distinguishes monitor from one-off tools like scrape and crawl, and the concrete use cases (price changes, blog posts, status updates) reinforce the purpose.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use when the user wants to watch a page for updates' and provides a guided setup cue. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use this tool or name alternatives like scrape for one-off fetches, so it misses the exclusion aspect.

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