Skip to main content
Glama
sweetcornna

free-search-mcp

by sweetcornna
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Fetch many URLs concurrently

fetch_batch
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch multiple URLs in parallel and get Markdown or JSON results; per-URL errors are returned individually so one failed page doesn't stop the batch.

Instructions

Fetch a list of URLs in parallel. Per-URL failures do not raise.

Best for:
- 2+ URLs you want to read in one round-trip.
- Reading the top N results of a previous `search` call.

Not recommended for:
- A single URL -> `fetch` (no list-wrapping overhead).
- "Search and then read" -> `research` collapses both into one tool call.
- PDFs/DOCX -> `read_doc` per file.

Returns:
- markdown (default): each page rendered as a Markdown section, separated
  by horizontal rules; failed URLs become inline error notes.
- json: list[dict], one entry per URL, with `error` set on failures.

Common mistakes:
- Passing a single URL inside a 1-element list: use `fetch` directly.
- Assuming an exception means the whole batch failed; check each item's
  `error` field instead.

Args:
    urls: List of absolute http(s) URLs (max 20 per call).
    render: Same as `fetch`.
    format: "markdown" or "json".

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYes
formatNomarkdown
renderNoauto

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.12.0
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        {
-          "items": {
-            "additionalProperties": true,
-            "type": "object"
-          },
-          "type": "array"
-        }
-      ],
-      "title": "Result"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "fetch_batchOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds crucial behavioral details: per-URL failures do not raise exceptions, the markdown output embeds inline error notes, and the JSON format includes an error field per entry. It also warns against common mistakes, exceeding what annotations alone convey.

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 organized into labeled sections (Best for, Not recommended, Returns, Common mistakes, Args) that are easy to scan. Every sentence adds value—there is no filler. The core purpose is stated first, and the detailed subsections are appropriately sequenced.

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 there is no output schema, the description fully specifies the two return formats (markdown sections with inline errors, and JSON list with error fields). It covers edge cases (single URL, failed items, maximum batch size) and references sibling tools for alternatives. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden. It explains each parameter: urls as absolute http(s) with a max of 20, render as 'Same as fetch' (referencing the sibling), and format with its two allowed values. It also clarifies the failure semantics associated with the urls parameter, which the schema does not.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Fetch a list of URLs in parallel') and immediately differentiates itself from siblings by naming fetch, research, and read_doc with explicit conditions. The purpose is unambiguous and the scope is clearly bounded.

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?

It provides a 'Best for' section listing concrete scenarios (2+ URLs, top N results of a search) and a 'Not recommended for' section with explicit alternatives (single URL -> fetch, search-and-read -> research, PDFs/DOCX -> read_doc). This gives an agent clear decision criteria for tool 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