Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
screaming-frog-mcp

screaming-frog-mcp

by marykovziridze
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

storage_summary

Analyze disk usage for Screaming Frog SEO Spider crawl storage. View total size and per-crawl breakdown of ProjectInstanceData to manage storage efficiently.

Instructions

Show disk usage of Screaming Frog's internal crawl storage. Returns total size and per-crawl breakdown of ProjectInstanceData.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "storage_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description implies a read-only operation but does not explicitly state it is non-destructive or require any permissions. With no annotations, it provides minimal behavioral 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 consists of two concise sentences that front-load the core purpose and add relevant detail without any wasted words.

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?

Given no parameters and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior (returns total size and per-crawl breakdown) and does not require additional context.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has no parameters, so the description adds no parameter-level details. However, schema coverage is 100% and the description is sufficient for a parameterless tool.

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 action ('Show disk usage') and resource ('internal crawl storage'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on crawling, status, or data export.

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?

The description implies when to use the tool (to check storage usage) but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or how it compares to alternatives like list_crawls or sf_check.

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