firecrawl_crawl_status
Check the current status of a website crawl job by providing its job ID.
Instructions
Check the status of a crawl job
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| jobId | Yes | The job ID returned from a crawl request |
Check the current status of a website crawl job by providing its job ID.
Check the status of a crawl job
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| jobId | Yes | The job ID returned from a crawl request |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, and the description only says 'check the status'. It doesn't describe whether this is a poll operation, if it might block, or what the response looks like. Minimal behavioral disclosure.
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?
Single sentence, no waste. But it could be slightly more informative without being verbose.
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 status check with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally complete. But it lacks information about the output format or behavior, leaving some gaps.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% with clear description for jobId. The tool description doesn't add new meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 tool checks crawl job status, which differentiates it from sibling tools that start a crawl, map, or scrape. However, it doesn't explicitly contrast with siblings, so score is 4.
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?
No guidance on when to use or not use this tool, nor mention of alternatives. It's implied it's used after starting a crawl, but no explicit instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ViperBlackSkull/firecrawl-local-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server