Skip to main content
Glama
scmdr

SourceSync.ai MCP Server

by scmdr

ingestWebsite

Crawl and ingest website content recursively with depth control and path filtering for knowledge management.

Instructions

Crawls and ingests content from a website recursively. Supports depth control and path filtering.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
namespaceIdNo
ingestConfigYes
tenantIdNo

Implementation Reference

  • Core implementation of ingestWebsite in SourceSyncApiClient: sends POST to /v1/ingest/website API endpoint with namespaceId and ingestConfig, applying default chunkConfig.
    public async ingestWebsite({
      ingestConfig,
    }: Omit<
      SourceSyncIngestWebsiteRequest,
      'namespaceId'
    >): Promise<SourceSyncIngestResponse> {
      return this.client
        .url('/v1/ingest/website')
        .json({
          namespaceId: this.namespaceId,
          ingestConfig: {
            ...ingestConfig,
            chunkConfig: SourceSyncApiClient.CHUNK_CONFIG,
          },
        } satisfies SourceSyncIngestWebsiteRequest)
        .post()
        .json<SourceSyncIngestResponse>()
    }
  • src/index.ts:291-308 (registration)
    MCP server.tool registration for 'ingestWebsite', wraps client.ingestWebsite call with safeApiCall and parameter handling.
    server.tool(
      'ingestWebsite',
      'Crawls and ingests content from a website recursively. Supports depth control and path filtering.',
      IngestWebsiteSchema.shape,
      async (params) => {
        return safeApiCall(async () => {
          const { namespaceId, ingestConfig, tenantId } = params
    
          // Create a client with the provided parameters
          const client = createClient({ namespaceId, tenantId })
    
          // Direct passthrough to the API
          return await client.ingestWebsite({
            ingestConfig,
          })
        })
      },
    )
  • Zod schema definition for IngestWebsite tool input validation, including namespaceId, ingestConfig with website-specific config, and tenantId.
    export const IngestWebsiteSchema = z.object({
      namespaceId: namespaceIdSchema.optional(),
      ingestConfig: z.object({
        source: z.literal(SourceSyncIngestionSource.WEBSITE),
        config: z.object({
          url: z.string(),
          maxDepth: z.number().optional(),
          maxLinks: z.number().optional(),
          includePaths: z.array(z.string()).optional(),
          excludePaths: z.array(z.string()).optional(),
          metadata: z.record(z.union([z.string(), z.array(z.string())])).optional(),
        }),
        chunkConfig: chunkConfigSchema.optional(),
      }),
      tenantId: tenantIdSchema,
    })
  • TypeScript type definition for SourceSyncIngestWebsiteRequest used by the API client.
    export type SourceSyncIngestWebsiteRequest = {
      namespaceId: string
      ingestConfig: {
        source: SourceSyncIngestionSource.WEBSITE
        config: {
          url: string
          maxDepth?: number
          maxLinks?: number
          includePaths?: string[]
          excludePaths?: string[]
          scrapeOptions?: SourceSyncScrapeOptions
          metadata?: Record<string, any>
        }
        chunkConfig?: SourceSyncChunkConfig
      }
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool 'crawls and ingests' which implies a write/mutation operation, but doesn't specify what 'ingests' means in practice (e.g., where content goes, what permissions are needed, whether it's idempotent). It also doesn't mention rate limits, error handling, or what the tool returns. For a complex ingestion tool with zero annotation coverage, this is inadequate.

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 is extremely concise - just two sentences that efficiently convey the core functionality. Every word earns its place: 'Crawls and ingests' (action), 'content from a website' (resource), 'recursively' (method), 'Supports depth control and path filtering' (key features). No wasted words or redundant information.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (recursive web crawling with ingestion), zero annotation coverage, 0% schema description coverage, no output schema, and multiple sibling ingestion tools, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'ingests' means operationally, where the content goes, what permissions are required, how errors are handled, or how this differs from other ingestion tools. For such a complex tool, this minimal description leaves too many questions unanswered.

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

Parameters2/5

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

With 0% schema description coverage and 3 parameters (including complex nested objects), the description provides minimal parameter information. It mentions 'depth control and path filtering' which hints at 'maxDepth', 'includePaths', and 'excludePaths', but doesn't explain the 10+ other parameters like 'namespaceId', 'tenantId', 'chunkConfig', or 'metadata'. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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's purpose: 'Crawls and ingests content from a website recursively.' It specifies the action (crawl and ingest) and resource (website content), and mentions key features like depth control and path filtering. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'ingestUrls' or 'fetchUrlContent', which prevents a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like 'ingestUrls', 'ingestSitemap', and 'fetchUrlContent', there's no indication of when this recursive crawling approach is preferred over other ingestion methods. The description lacks any context about prerequisites, constraints, or comparative use cases.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/scmdr/sourcesyncai-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server