mcp-link-doctor

check-links

Scans a website for broken links, missing meta tags, and redirect chains. Provides a structured report with fix suggestions to improve site health.

Instructions

Find broken links, missing meta tags, and redirect chains on any website. Returns a structured report with fix suggestions.

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": "check-links"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The URL of the website to analyze

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 28, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses it performs network analysis and returns a report, but does not mention if it's read-only, any side effects, permissions, or rate limits.

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?

Two efficient sentences that front-load the main purpose and include a note about the output. No wasted words.

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?

Given no output schema and simple parameters, description covers the main actions and output. Could mention URL protocol requirements or result format details, but sufficient for a straightforward tool.

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?

Only one parameter 'url' with schema description 'The URL of the website to analyze'. Description does not add value beyond schema, and schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3.

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 finds broken links, missing meta tags, and redirect chains, which is specific and distinct from generic check tools. It mentions returning a structured report with fix suggestions.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. The description implies it's for website analysis, but lacks when-not-to-use criteria or alternatives (though no siblings exist).

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

check-linksA