Extract clean readable text and metadata from one web page so AI agents can analyze page content without parsing raw HTML.
Extract clean readable text and metadata from one web page at api.sitesy.ca. Costs 0.01 USDC per call on Base mainnet, paid automatically from the wallet configured in PAYER_PRIVATE_KEY.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | A web page address, for example https://example.com |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the paid nature of the tool: 0.01 USDC per call on Base mainnet, paid automatically from the configured wallet. However, it omits error behavior, rate limits, payment failure handling, and return format details.
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 description is two tight sentences with no wasted language. It front-loads the purpose and follows with the critical cost/payment detail.
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?
The tool is simple, with one required parameter and no output schema. The description covers the core output concept and payment behavior, but without an output schema it does not explain the returned text/metadata structure or failure modes.
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 schema has 100% description coverage for the single URL parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add syntax or format guidance beyond the schema's example URL.
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 states a specific verb and resource: extract clean readable text and metadata from one web page. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as page_metadata or website_intelligence.
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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like page_metadata or website_intelligence. It implies the tool is for reading a single page, but there are no exclusions or alternative-routing instructions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.