Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fairquery-web

fairquery-web

Official
by fairquery
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Bulk website tech, SEO & AI-readiness audit (Apify, paid)

web_batch_audit
Read-onlyIdempotent

Bulk audit up to thousands of websites in one call to uncover tech stacks, SEO issues, security headers, AI-bot rules, sitemaps, and llms.txt, with per-site scores for lead enrichment or market scans.

Instructions

Bulk audit up to thousands of websites in one call via the Fairquery Apify Actor fairquery/website-tech-seo-ai-readiness: technologies, on-page SEO, security headers, robots.txt AI-bot rules, XML sitemap, llms.txt, seo_score and ai_readiness_score per site. WHEN TO USE: lists of 20+ sites (lead enrichment, portfolio/market scans) where you want server-side parallelism and a dataset. For one or a few sites prefer the free tools: web_quick_check, web_seo_audit, web_ai_crawler_access, web_tech_stack, web_sitemap_info, web_security_headers. Rows can be stored and later diffed with web_compare_snapshots. BEHAVIOR: runs the Actor via the Apify API (run-sync), a few polite GET requests per site, respects robots.txt by default, no JS rendering. Requires APIFY_TOKEN (never logged). Typical 2-10 s per site, parallel. COST: paid (billed to your Apify account, pay-per-event): $0.00005 per run + $0.0015 per site row; error rows are free. 50 sites ~ $0.08. RETURNS: one "site" row per unique URL (a snapshot web_compare_snapshots accepts) or free "error" rows: code (INPUT_EMPTY, INVALID_URL, MAX_SITES_EXCEEDED, ROBOTS_DISALLOWED, FETCH_FAILED, HTTP_ERROR, BLOCKED_OR_RATE_LIMITED), message, retryable, input. Tool-level errors: APIFY_TOKEN_MISSING, APIFY_ACTOR_RUN_FAILED. WHEN NOT TO USE: for 1-20 sites or interactive questions use the free tools above (same checks). PARAMETERS: urls: bare domains use https, entries are deduped, and each unique URL is one billed site row; invalid, robots-disallowed or unreachable entries become free error rows. maxSites (default 500) caps unique URLs per run and is therefore your spend cap; extras get one free MAX_SITES_EXCEEDED row. The check* flags only remove work and fields, never change the price: checkRobots=false sets ai_bots / robots_txt_found to null, checkSitemap=false sitemap_*, checkLlmsTxt=false llms_txt_*; MISSING_ROBOTS_TXT / MISSING_SITEMAP issues are then not raised, so seo_score is not comparable across different flag settings. respectRobotsTxt is independent of checkRobots: robots.txt is still fetched when it is true, and a disallowed page yields a free ROBOTS_DISALLOWED row instead of an audit; set false only for sites you own or may audit. EXAMPLE: {"urls":["vercel.com","netlify.com"],"checkLlmsTxt":false} -> {count:2, items:[{type:"site", domain:"vercel.com", seo_score:..., ...}, ...]}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYesRequired. 1-5000 domains or http(s) URLs; bare domains use https; one billed row per unique URL. Example: ["vercel.com","https://www.python.org/about/"]
maxSitesNoOptional integer 1-10000, default 500. Safety/spend cap on unique URLs per run; extras produce one free MAX_SITES_EXCEEDED error row. Example: 100
checkRobotsNoOptional boolean, default true. Fetch robots.txt and report allowed/partial/blocked per AI bot; false = ai_bots null
checkLlmsTxtNoOptional boolean, default true. Check /llms.txt and /llms-full.txt; false = llms_txt fields null
checkSitemapNoOptional boolean, default true. Find the XML sitemap and count its URLs; false = sitemap fields null
respectRobotsTxtNoOptional boolean, default true (recommended). Skip pages robots.txt disallows for generic crawlers, emitting a free ROBOTS_DISALLOWED row

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYesNumber of rows returned
itemsYesResult rows; each has a "type" field (data rows or machine-readable "error" rows)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed6 schema fields changedv1.2.4
    • changedInput schema / properties / checkLlmsTxt / description
      Previous value: -"Check /llms.txt and /llms-full.txt (default true)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. Check /llms.txt and /llms-full.txt; false = llms_txt fields null"
    • changedInput schema / properties / checkRobots / description
      Previous value: -"Fetch robots.txt and report allow/partial/blocked per AI bot (default true)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. Fetch robots.txt and report allowed/partial/blocked per AI bot; false = ai_bots null"
    • changedInput schema / properties / checkSitemap / description
      Previous value: -"Find the XML sitemap and count URLs (default true)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true. Find the XML sitemap and count its URLs; false = sitemap fields null"
    • changedInput schema / properties / maxSites / description
      Previous value: -"Safety cap on unique URLs per run (default 500); extras produce a MAX_SITES_EXCEEDED error row"New value: +"Optional integer 1-10000, default 500. Safety/spend cap on unique URLs per run; extras produce one free MAX_SITES_EXCEEDED error row. Example: 100"
    • changedInput schema / properties / respectRobotsTxt / description
      Previous value: -"Skip pages robots.txt disallows for generic crawlers, emitting ROBOTS_DISALLOWED (default true, recommended)"New value: +"Optional boolean, default true (recommended). Skip pages robots.txt disallows for generic crawlers, emitting a free ROBOTS_DISALLOWED row"
    • changedInput schema / properties / urls / description
      Previous value: -"Domains or URLs, e.g. [\"vercel.com\",\"https://www.python.org/about/\"]. Bare domains use https. One row per unique URL."New value: +"Required. 1-5000 domains or http(s) URLs; bare domains use https; one billed row per unique URL. Example: [\"vercel.com\",\"https://www.python.org/about/\"]"
  2. Addedv1.2.1

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/openWorld/non-destructive, but the description goes far beyond them: run-sync execution model, GET-only, no JS rendering, robots.txt compliance, APIFY_TOKEN requirement (with 'never logged'), 2-10s per site parallel timing, full pay-per-event cost breakdown with a worked 50-site example, and enumerated site-level and tool-level error codes. Nothing here contradicts the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Labeled sections (WHEN TO USE, BEHAVIOR, COST, RETURNS, WHEN NOT TO USE, PARAMETERS, EXAMPLE) keep a long description scannable and front-loaded with purpose. Slight redundancy remains — the WHEN NOT TO USE line repeats the 1-20 site / free-tools guidance already given — so it is dense but not maximal.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a paid, external-Actor tool with 6 parameters, the description covers cost, auth, timing, failure modes, output shape, and flag interactions; the output schema covers return structure and the description still sketches the row/error shapes an agent needs to reason about spend and retries. Nothing required for a correct call is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is already 100%, yet the description adds real semantics: bare domains default to https, dedupe/billing per unique URL, maxSites as the effective spend cap with free overflow rows, how each check* flag nulls specific field groups and breaks seo_score comparability across settings, and how respectRobotsTxt is independent of checkRobots. This is well beyond what the schema conveys.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — bulk audit of websites via a named Apify Actor — and enumerates exactly what is checked (tech, SEO, security headers, robots.txt AI rules, sitemap, llms.txt, scores). It also names the sibling free tools it is distinct from, so an agent can route between bulk and single-site checks without opening a schema.

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?

Explicit WHEN TO USE (lists of 20+ sites, parallelism, dataset output) and WHEN NOT TO USE (1-20 sites or interactive questions use the free tools), with the alternative tools named by name. The threshold and the reason for choosing each path are both given.

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