Universal Web Retrieval MCP

web_fetch

Fetch one or up to five URLs and return page content as Markdown, automatically failing over across providers and allowing optional per-call provider order overrides.

Instructions

Fetch one URL's page content as Markdown with automatic provider failover (default: AnySearch -> Tavily -> DDGS.extract; operators can reorder the chain with UWR_FETCH_CHAIN). Auth is automatic (keyed when a key is configured, else official keyless). Accepts a single url string, or urls array (max 5) for batch. providers overrides the chain order for this call. Returns JSON array of {url, content, title, content_type, provider, mode, latency_ms, attempts} — failed URLs carry an error field instead. Note: JS-rendered, login-walled or CAPTCHA-protected pages are not guaranteed.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No
`urls`	No
`providers`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Oct 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / providers

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "items": {
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Providers"
+}

First observedv0.1.0Sep 14, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so: it names the default provider chain and its env-var override, explains that auth is automatic (keyed or keyless), documents the per-URL error field, and warns that JS-rendered, login-walled or CAPTCHA pages may fail. That is exactly the operational context an agent needs before committing to a fetch.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then parameters, then return shape, then caveats — a sensible order. It is a dense single block, and listing all eight return fields is slightly redundant given an output schema exists, but no sentence is wasted.

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?

For a 3-parameter fetch tool with no annotations, the description covers selection, batching limits, provider override, auth behavior, failure semantics, and known page-type limitations. Nothing an agent needs to call this correctly is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it defines `url` as a single string, `urls` as a batch capped at 5, and `providers` as a per-call chain override. It leaves one ambiguity — which parameter wins if both `url` and `urls` are supplied, and that neither is marked required.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch one URL's page content as Markdown') plus the failover mechanism, which immediately distinguishes it from web_search. An agent knows this retrieves page bodies rather than search results without opening the schema.

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?

Conveys usage shape (single `url` vs `urls` batch of max 5, `providers` overriding the chain for one call) but never states when to prefer this over web_search or list_providers. The distinction is inferable from the names, not from explicit guidance or exclusions.

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

Deploy Server