Website Auditor MCP

Shareable report + badge

get_report

Read-only

Generate a shareable audit report URL and HTML badge snippet for easy client sharing or embedding. Without a subscription, request a sample audit to preview the output.

Instructions

Get a shareable report URL and the embeddable "Audited by Website Auditor" badge snippet for a website. Use this when someone wants to "share," "export," "send a client," or "embed" the audit result. Returns a link and an HTML badge snippet. Requires a Website Auditor subscription ($10/month; eligible new customers get a 7-day free trial — payment method required, no charge until the trial ends) — if the user doesn't have one, call get_sample_audit first to show them the exact output format, free and with no API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	The website domain, e.g. "example.com".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`badge_html`	Yes
`report_url`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.23Sep 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "badge_html": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "report_url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "report_url",
+    "badge_html"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.6Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false; the description adds the subscription prerequisite, trial terms, and the fallback path to get_sample_audit. It also explicitly states what is returned, going beyond annotations and schema to inform callers of gating and side expectations.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by use cases, then requirements. Every sentence earns its place: output, when to use, subscription prerequisite, and fallback action. There is no redundant filler or vague wording.

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?

With an output schema present and a single parameter fully described, the description covers all decision-critical context: when to use, what prerequisite applies, and what to do when it is not met. Nothing needed for correct invocation is missing.

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%, and the sole 'domain' parameter already has a clear schema description ('The website domain, e.g. "example.com"'). The description's phrase 'for a website' adds little beyond the schema, so a baseline score of 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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a shareable report URL and the embeddable "Audited by Website Auditor" badge snippet for a website.' It clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like run_audit or get_sample_audit by naming the exact output (link + HTML badge snippet).

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicit when-to-use guidance is present: 'Use this when someone wants to "share," "export," "send a client," or "embed" the audit result.' It also provides an explicit alternative and condition: if the user lacks a subscription, call get_sample_audit first. This is direct when/when-not guidance.

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

Deploy Server