Skip to main content
Glama
ashishdevthakur3-max

Firecrawl MCP Server

firecrawl_map

Discover all indexed URLs on a website to identify pages for scraping or locate specific sections before content extraction.

Instructions

Map a website to discover all indexed URLs on the site.

Best for: Discovering URLs on a website before deciding what to scrape; finding specific sections of a website. Not recommended for: When you already know which specific URL you need (use scrape or batch_scrape); when you need the content of the pages (use scrape after mapping). Common mistakes: Using crawl to discover URLs instead of map. Prompt Example: "List all URLs on example.com." Usage Example:

{
  "name": "firecrawl_map",
  "arguments": {
    "url": "https://example.com"
  }
}

Returns: Array of URLs found on the site.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesStarting URL for URL discovery
searchNoOptional search term to filter URLs
ignoreSitemapNoSkip sitemap.xml discovery and only use HTML links
sitemapOnlyNoOnly use sitemap.xml for discovery, ignore HTML links
includeSubdomainsNoInclude URLs from subdomains in results
limitNoMaximum number of URLs to return

Implementation Reference

  • The handler logic for the 'firecrawl_map' tool, which validates arguments and calls the client.mapUrl method.
    case 'firecrawl_map': {
      if (!isMapOptions(args)) {
        throw new Error('Invalid arguments for firecrawl_map');
      }
      const { url, ...options } = args;
      const response = await client.mapUrl(url, {
        ...options,
        // @ts-expect-error Extended API options including origin
        origin: 'mcp-server',
      });
      if ('error' in response) {
        throw new Error(response.error);
      }
      if (!response.links) {
        throw new Error('No links received from Firecrawl API');
      }
      return {
        content: [
          { type: 'text', text: trimResponseText(response.links.join('\n')) },
        ],
        isError: false,
      };
    }
    
    case 'firecrawl_crawl': {
  • src/index.ts:203-220 (registration)
    The definition and registration metadata for the 'firecrawl_map' tool.
    const MAP_TOOL: Tool = {
      name: 'firecrawl_map',
      description: `
    Map a website to discover all indexed URLs on the site.
    
    **Best for:** Discovering URLs on a website before deciding what to scrape; finding specific sections of a website.
    **Not recommended for:** When you already know which specific URL you need (use scrape or batch_scrape); when you need the content of the pages (use scrape after mapping).
    **Common mistakes:** Using crawl to discover URLs instead of map.
    **Prompt Example:** "List all URLs on example.com."
    **Usage Example:**
    \`\`\`json
    {
      "name": "firecrawl_map",
      "arguments": {
        "url": "https://example.com"
      }
    }
    \`\`\`
  • Type validation function for the input arguments of 'firecrawl_map'.
    function isMapOptions(args: unknown): args is MapParams & { url: string } {
      return (
        typeof args === 'object' &&
        args !== null &&
        'url' in args &&
        typeof (args as { url: unknown }).url === 'string'
      );
    }
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by explaining what the tool returns ('Array of URLs'), its discovery methods (indexed URLs, with options for sitemap vs HTML links implied), and constraints (maximum via 'limit' parameter). It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or error behaviors, but provides substantial operational context.

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 well-structured with clear sections (purpose, best for, not recommended, common mistakes, examples) and every sentence earns its place. It's front-loaded with the core purpose and uses efficient formatting without wasted words.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description provides good context: purpose, usage guidelines, examples, and return format. It could be more complete by explaining potential limitations (e.g., depth of discovery, timeouts) or error cases, but covers the essential operational context adequately.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add parameter-specific semantics beyond what's in the schema (e.g., it mentions 'search term to filter URLs' but the schema already describes this). The 'Prompt Example' and 'Usage Example' illustrate parameter usage but don't provide additional semantic meaning.

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 the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('map a website', 'discover all indexed URLs') and distinguishes it from siblings by explicitly contrasting with 'scrape', 'batch_scrape', and 'crawl'. It identifies the resource (URLs on a site) and scope (all indexed URLs).

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?

The description provides explicit guidance with dedicated sections: 'Best for' (discovering URLs before scraping, finding sections), 'Not recommended for' (when specific URL known, when content needed), and 'Common mistakes' (using crawl instead). It names alternatives (scrape, batch_scrape) and clearly defines when to use/avoid this tool.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ashishdevthakur3-max/firecrawl-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server