Skip to main content
Glama

Page metadata ($0.002)

weblens_metadata

Extract a web page's title, description, Open Graph tags, JSON-LD and favicon so AI agents can use clean structured metadata; each call costs $0.002 USDC.

Instructions

Get a web page's title, description, Open Graph tags, JSON-LD and favicon. Costs $0.002 USDC.

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": "weblens_metadata"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPublic http(s) URL of the page

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

Does 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 $0.002 USDC cost and the metadata fields returned, and "Get" implies a read-only operation, but it does not mention authentication, rate limits, error behavior, or whether the response is cached or live.

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?

Two tightly written sentences with no wasted words. The returned fields are front-loaded, and the cost is appended as a secondary but important detail.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool, the description is nearly complete: it names the returned metadata fields and states the cost, while the schema fully covers the URL input. The main residual gap is the absence of any output-schema replacement detail such as response shape or error behavior, but the enumerated fields cover the essential return semantics.

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% for the single url parameter, so the schema already establishes that a public http(s) URL is required. The description adds no input-format or usage nuance beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema fully documents the parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb, "Get", and a specific resource, a web page's metadata, then enumerates the exact fields returned: title, description, Open Graph tags, JSON-LD, and favicon. This clearly separates it from a generic extractor, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as weblens_extract or weblens_links.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by the listed metadata fields; there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool instead of weblens_extract, weblens_links, or weblens_structure. An agent can infer that it is appropriate when page-level metadata is needed, but no exclusions or alternative-selection guidance are provided.

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