Skip to main content
Glama
wxs-lang

webscout-mcp

by wxs-lang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

web_fetch

Fetch any URL and extract its main content in incremental windows. Use the returned start_char to retrieve subsequent chunks until all content is read.

Instructions

Fetch a URL and return one window of its extracted main content.

Progressive delivery: each call returns at most max_chars chars (default 8000). If the response contains continuation.has_more=true, more content is available locally. To read the next window, call this SAME tool again with the SAME url/extract/output_format/max_chars and set start_char to the previous continuation.next_start_char. Follow-up windows are served from a local snapshot (no new HTTP fetch, extraction, or browser). Stop when has_more is false. You do not need to read the whole page unless the task requires it.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
extractNo
max_charsNo
start_charNo
bypass_cacheNo
output_formatNomarkdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.3.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / start_char
      Added value: +{
+  "default": 0,
+  "title": "Start Char",
+  "type": "integer"
+}
  2. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that each call returns at most max_chars, that follow-up windows are served from a local snapshot without new HTTP fetches, and that continuation is indicated by has_more. This is strong transparency, though it omits details on error handling or the behavior of the bypass_cache parameter.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose and then provides necessary detail on the progressive delivery pattern. It is slightly verbose but every sentence adds value about the continuation mechanism and stopping condition. It could be tightened, but the structure is logical and efficient.

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 that an output schema exists (which likely defines the return structure and continuation fields), the description covers the core interaction loop, including how to iterate and when to stop. It does not explain error handling or edge cases, but these are likely covered by the output schema or are secondary. For an agent to successfully use the tool, the provided guidance is sufficient.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains start_char and max_chars in the context of continuation, and mentions extract/output_format/max_chars as required for repeat calls, but does not define what extract or output_format do (e.g., what formats are allowed, what extract=false means). It partially compensates for the schema gap but leaves several parameters unexplained.

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 first sentence states a clear verb ('Fetch'), resource ('a URL'), and outcome ('return one window of its extracted main content'). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like web_crawl (crawling) and web_search (searching) by focusing on single-URL extraction with a windowing mechanism. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit step-by-step usage for progressive delivery: how to call again with start_char, when to stop (has_more=false), and a note that full reading is optional. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives like web_extract, but the usage pattern is clearly explained and actionable.

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