Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gpsem

gpsem

by puples
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

Problèmes d'une page

getScreamingFrogPage
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Screaming Frog page-level issues for a URL, including broken or redirected links and pages linking to it. Specify site and crawl ID to analyze specific page problems.

Instructions

Problèmes d'une page — Problèmes propres à la page, liens vers des URL en erreur ou redirigées, pages qui la lient si elle est en erreur. — (GET /sites/{siteId}/screaming-frog/page)

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": {
      "siteId": "<siteId>",
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "getScreamingFrogPage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL de la page
crawlNoID du crawl (défaut : dernier crawl importé)
siteIdYesID site encodé (hashid)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the GET endpoint and the data scope, which is consistent. It does not disclose any crawl dependency or response behavior beyond the content list, but there is no contradiction with annotations.

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 compact but somewhat redundant: it repeats 'Problèmes d'une page' from the title and then says 'Problèmes propres à la page,' which restates the same idea. The key specifics (links to errored/redirected URLs, linking pages) and the endpoint are present, but a few words could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 read-only tool with three schema-covered parameters and no output schema, the description provides a reasonably complete picture of the response content and the endpoint. It could explicitly mention the response shape or the requirement that a crawl exists, but the essential information for calling the tool is present in the description and schema.

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 description coverage is 100%: url ('URL de la page'), crawl ('ID du crawl'), and siteId ('ID site encodé') are all documented. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 identifies the resource as a page's Screaming Frog issues, enumerating the specific data it returns: page-specific problems, links to errored/redirected URLs, and pages linking to an errored page. This distinguishes it from siblings like getScreamingFrogIssue (a single issue) or getScreamingFrogDashboard (an overview). It lacks an explicit action verb, but the name 'getScreamingFrogPage' and the GET endpoint fill that gap.

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 it—when you need problems specific to a page in a crawl—but gives no explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions. It does not mention how it relates to getScreamingFrogIssue, listScreamingFrogCrawls, or the dashboard. The usage context is inferable from the content, not stated.

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