Fetch any web page and extract its article text with a pay-per-call API. Get clean, readable content from any URL for $0.01 USDC.
Fetch any web page and return its clean article text ($0.01 USDC/call).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Page URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. It does add important context: the call costs $0.01 USDC and the result is cleaned article text rather than raw HTML. However, it omits failure behavior, dynamic-content limitations, paywall handling, non-article pages, and rate limits, and 'any web page' may overpromise.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, output, and pricing without filler. Every phrase earns its place.
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?
For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately explains what it fetches, what it returns, and what it costs. It could be more complete with caveats about page types and failures, but the core contract is sufficient for simple invocation.
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 input schema already documents url as 'Page URL' with 100% coverage. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond that, so it meets the baseline 3 but does not exceed it.
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 clearly states the action ('Fetch any web page') and the output ('return its clean article text'). This distinguishes x402_read from siblings like x402_search (web discovery), x402_screenshot/x402_render (visual output), and x402_metadata (page metadata).
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?
There is no guidance about when to use x402_read versus its many siblings, nor any exclusions or alternative routing. The description implies use for extracting article-like text from a specific URL, but it never says 'use this when...' or 'for X, use...'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.