Skip to main content
Glama
yantrix-ai

@praveen030686/data-apis-mcp

Extract Page Metadata

web_extract_metadata
Read-onlyIdempotent

Extract metadata from any URL including title, author, description, images, links, and headings using micropayments on Base.

Instructions

Extract title, author, description, images, links, and headings from any URL. Costs $0.02 USDC per request via x402 on Base.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesURL to extract metadata from

Implementation Reference

  • The handler and registration logic for the "web_extract_metadata" tool.
      "web_extract_metadata",
      {
        title: "Extract Page Metadata",
        description: `Extract title, author, description, images, links, and headings from any URL.
    Costs $0.02 USDC per request via x402 on Base.`,
        inputSchema: {
          url: z.string().url().describe("URL to extract metadata from"),
        },
        annotations: { readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false, idempotentHint: true, openWorldHint: true },
      },
      async ({ url }) => {
        const data = await apiPost(`${WEB_EXTRACT_API}/api/v1/extract/metadata`, { url });
        return { content: [{ type: "text", text: JSON.stringify(data, null, 2) }] };
      }
    );
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world hints, so the agent knows this is a safe, repeatable operation. The description adds valuable context beyond annotations by disclosing the cost ('$0.02 USDC per request via x402 on Base'), which is critical behavioral information not captured in structured fields. No contradictions with annotations.

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 extremely concise with two sentences: the first states the purpose and scope, and the second provides critical cost information. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff, making it highly efficient and front-loaded with essential details.

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 the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, 100% schema coverage, rich annotations), the description is nearly complete. It covers purpose, cost, and scope. The main gap is the lack of output schema, so return values (e.g., format of extracted metadata) are undocumented, but annotations provide safety context, making it sufficient for basic use.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'url' parameter fully documented. The description does not add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides (e.g., URL format constraints or examples). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the full burden of parameter documentation.

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 specific action ('extract') and resources ('title, author, description, images, links, and headings') from a specific target ('any URL'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like web_extract_text or web_extract_structured by specifying the exact metadata fields extracted, making the purpose unambiguous and differentiated.

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?

The description implies usage for extracting metadata from URLs, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like web_extract_structured or web_extract_text. It mentions a cost, which hints at financial considerations, but lacks clear when/when-not scenarios or named alternatives for metadata extraction tasks.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/yantrix-ai/x402-apis-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server