Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
ScrapingDog-MCP

ScrapingDog-MCP

by alessandrobenigni
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

webhook

Configure a webhook URL to receive scraped data automatically via HTTP POST for async workflows and database pipelines.

Instructions

Receives scraped data automatically at a user-configured endpoint instead of polling for results. Configure a webhook URL in the dashboard and Scrapingdog POSTs the scraped content directly to it once ready — ideal for async workflows and database pipelines. [Credits: Not specified in documentation] Notes: Calling this endpoint returns only a session id (sid) immediately — the actual scraped content is delivered asynchronously via HTTP POST to the webhook URL configured in the dashboard, not in the initial API response. Returns: Immediate response: { sid: '' }. Actual scraped payload is POSTed later to the configured webhook URL (shape not documented on this page).

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "webhook"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL of the page to scrape and send to the configured webhook.
dynamicNoSet to true to enable JavaScript rendering (headless browser). Set to false for faster plain HTTP requests. (default: true)
webhook_idNoIdentifies the target webhook by name, as configured in the Scrapingdog dashboard. If omitted, the default webhook is used.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the async behavior: immediate session ID response followed by asynchronous POST to webhook. It notes the undocumented webhook payload shape, which is transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is fairly verbose including a redundant 'Credits: Not specified' line and a returns section that repeats the notes. Could be tightened without losing clarity.

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 simple 3-param tool with no output schema, the description covers core behavior and return value. However, it lacks information on error handling, authentication requirements, or potential failure modes, leaving some gaps.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add further meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states it receives scraped data at a configured webhook endpoint asynchronously, using a session ID pattern. It explicitly distinguishes from polling and is unique among sibling tools.

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 advises using this tool for async workflows and database pipelines, explicitly contrasting with polling. However, it does not specify when not to use or compare to synchronous scraping tools.

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