Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
oh-my-mcp

oh-my-mcp

by quyansiyuanwang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

fetch_webpage

Retrieve the HTML content from any webpage by providing its URL. Set a custom timeout for requests.

Instructions

Fetch the HTML content of a webpage.

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": "fetch_webpage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL of the webpage to fetch
timeoutNoRequest timeout in seconds (default: 10)

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior like redirect handling, cookie support, user-agent, or truncation. It only states it fetches HTML, leaving critical traits unknown.

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?

The single sentence is concise and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it is slightly under-specified for a tool with no annotations.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists (context signal), so the description can be lighter, but it still fails to mention return format, error handling, or limitations (e.g., timeout behavior). Adequate but incomplete.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the parameter names and defaults already in the schema.

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 fetches HTML content of a webpage, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish itself from siblings like `fetch_webpage_text` or `http_request`, missing differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., `fetch_webpage_text` for text extraction, `browser_navigate` for JavaScript rendering, or `http_request` for custom requests). The agent receives no criteria for selection.

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