Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
enesjakozh
wolfyy970

Docs Fetch MCP Server

by wolfyy970
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

MCP 서버 문서 가져오기

재귀적 탐색 기능을 갖춘 웹 콘텐츠를 가져오는 모델 컨텍스트 프로토콜(MCP) 서버입니다. 이 서버를 통해 LLM은 웹 페이지와 문서를 자율적으로 탐색하여 특정 주제에 대해 학습할 수 있습니다.

개요

Docs Fetch MCP 서버는 LLM이 웹 콘텐츠를 검색하고 탐색할 수 있는 간단하면서도 강력한 방법을 제공합니다. 다음과 같은 기능을 제공합니다.

  • 모든 웹 페이지에서 깔끔하고 읽기 쉬운 콘텐츠 가져오기

  • 지정된 깊이까지 연결된 페이지의 재귀적 탐색

  • 포괄적인 정보를 수집하기 위한 동일 도메인 링크 탐색

  • 콘텐츠가 풍부한 페이지에 초점을 맞춘 탐색 링크의 스마트 필터링

이 도구는 사용자가 LLM을 통해 문서나 웹 콘텐츠를 탐색하여 특정 주제에 대해 알아보고자 할 때 특히 유용합니다.

Related MCP server: Spider MCP Server

특징

  • 콘텐츠 추출 : 탐색, 광고, 관련 없는 요소와 같은 방해 요소를 제거하여 웹 페이지에서 주요 콘텐츠를 깔끔하게 추출합니다.

  • 링크 분석 : 페이지에서 링크를 식별하고 추출하여 관련성을 평가합니다.

  • 재귀 탐색 : 동일한 도메인 내의 관련 콘텐츠에 대한 링크를 지정된 깊이까지 따라갑니다.

  • 병렬 처리 : 동시 요청과 적절한 오류 처리를 통해 콘텐츠를 효율적으로 크롤링합니다.

  • 강력한 오류 처리 : 네트워크 문제, 시간 초과 및 잘못된 페이지를 우아하게 처리합니다.

  • 이중 전략 접근 방식 : 더 복잡한 페이지에 대한 대체 수단으로 Puppeteer를 사용하여 빠른 Axios 요청을 먼저 사용합니다.

  • 시간 초과 방지 : MCP 시간 제한 내에서 안정적인 작동을 보장하기 위해 글로벌 시간 초과 처리를 구현합니다.

  • 부분 결과 : 일부 페이지가 완전히 로드되지 않더라도 사용 가능한 콘텐츠를 반환합니다.

용법

서버는 단일 MCP 도구를 노출합니다.

fetch_doc_content

지정된 깊이까지 링크된 페이지를 탐색할 수 있는 기능을 통해 웹 페이지 콘텐츠를 가져옵니다.

매개변수:

  • url (문자열, 필수): 가져올 웹 페이지의 URL

  • depth (숫자, 선택 사항, 기본값: 1): 디렉토리/링크 탐색의 최대 깊이(1-5)

보고:

지엑스피1

설치

  1. 이 저장소를 복제하세요:

git clone https://github.com/wolfyy970/docs-fetch-mcp.git
cd docs-fetch-mcp

  1. 종속성 설치:

npm install

  1. 프로젝트를 빌드하세요:

npm run build

  1. Claude Client에서 MCP 설정을 구성하세요.

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "docs-fetch": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": [
        "/path/to/docs-fetch-mcp/build/index.js"
      ],
      "env": {
        "MCP_TRANSPORT": "pipe"
      }
    }
  }
}

종속성

  • @modelcontextprotocol/sdk : MCP 서버 SDK

  • puppeteer : 웹 페이지 상호작용을 위한 헤드리스 브라우저

  • axios : 요청을 만드는 HTTP 클라이언트

개발

개발 모드에서 서버를 실행하려면:

npm run dev

특허

MIT

Available Tools

1 tool
fetch_doc_contentC

Fetch web page content with the ability to explore linked pages up to a specified depth

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
depthNoMaximum depth of directory/link exploration (default: 1)
urlYesURL of the web page to fetch

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
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 describes the core functionality (fetching and exploring links) but lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or what the response looks like (e.g., format, size limits). This leaves significant gaps for a tool that interacts with external web resources.

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 a single, efficient sentence that clearly states the tool's purpose and key feature (exploring linked pages). It is front-loaded with the main action and includes no redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 complexity of fetching web content with link exploration, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like authentication needs, rate limits, or response format, which are critical for effective tool use in this context.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('url' and 'depth') with descriptions and constraints. The description adds minimal value by implying the depth parameter relates to link exploration, but it doesn't provide additional syntax or format details beyond what the schema specifies.

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 with a specific verb ('fetch') and resource ('web page content'), and it adds valuable context about exploring linked pages. However, since there are no sibling tools mentioned, it doesn't need to differentiate from alternatives, which keeps it from reaching 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, prerequisites, or exclusions. It mentions the ability to explore linked pages up to a specified depth, but this is more about functionality than usage context.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 1 tool updatev1.0.0
    • First observedfetch_doc_content
Deploy Server
Let your AI agent see the webWeb-to-screenshot MCP for Claude, Cursor and Codex. No cookie banners. Free to start.snap-render.comAd

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Scored across 1 tool

Disambiguation5/5

With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'fetch_doc_content' has a clear and distinct purpose, making it impossible for an agent to confuse it with other tools.

Naming Consistency5/5

Since there is only one tool, it inherently follows a consistent naming pattern. The tool name 'fetch_doc_content' uses a verb_noun structure, which is clear and predictable, and there are no other tools to cause inconsistency.

Tool Count2/5

A single tool is too few for a server named 'Docs Fetch MCP Server', which implies a domain involving document fetching and exploration. While the tool is well-described, one tool feels thin and insufficient for comprehensive operations like managing fetched content or handling different document types, limiting the server's utility.

Completeness2/5

The tool surface is severely incomplete for the inferred domain of document fetching. It only provides a fetch operation with depth control, missing essential functions such as listing fetched documents, updating or deleting cached content, searching within documents, or handling errors, which are necessary for a complete workflow.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • Crawl4AI RAG MCP Server

    Chillbruhhh
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Provides AI agents and coding assistants with advanced web crawling and RAG capabilities, allowing them to scrape websites and leverage that knowledge through various retrieval strategies.
    2
    MIT

  • Spider MCP Server

    oeo
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    Enables crawling and extracting clean content from documentation websites with optional LLM-powered analysis for intelligent summaries, code example extraction, and content classification.
    -

  • Fetch MCP Server

    MaartenSmeets
    A
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    C
    maintenance
    Enables LLMs to fetch and extract web content using browser automation, OCR, and multiple extraction methods, handling JavaScript rendering and anti-scraping techniques.
    17
    MIT

Appeared in Searches