Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Delx MCP Server

Delx MCP Server

by davidmosiah
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Docs Site Map

util_docs_site_map
Read-onlyIdempotent

Map a documentation surface using crawl hints, links, feeds, and reference sections extracted from a URL.

Instructions

Map a docs surface with crawl hints, docs links, feeds, and likely reference sections. Delx Agent Utilities are separate from the free witness protocol and may expose x402 utility pricing.

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": "util_docs_site_map"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesDocs or product URL
timeoutNoTimeout in seconds (1-15)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.8

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint. The description adds no new behavioral traits beyond the implicit read-only nature of 'mapping'. The pricing note does not clarify behavior.

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 concise but includes a second sentence about pricing and separation that is not directly relevant to tool usage, diluting focus.

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 no output schema, the description hints at output contents (crawl hints, links, feeds, reference sections). This provides adequate contextual completeness for a simple tool with rich annotations.

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%, with both parameters already described. The description does not add any additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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 clearly states the tool maps a docs surface and lists components (crawl hints, links, feeds, reference sections). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like util_sitemap_probe or util_feed_discover, which may have overlapping functionality.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. The second sentence about pricing is irrelevant to usage context.

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