Skip to main content
Glama

Ask a question about a web page

web_ask_run
Read-only

Ask a natural-language question about a specific web page and get an LLM-generated answer. Accepts a URL.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesNatural-language question to answer about the page content.
urlYesWeb page URL to fetch.
contextYesDescribe the user's underlying goal in one sentence — not the tool you are calling.
llm_modelYesThe exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. "claude-opus-4-8", "gpt-5.2"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass "unknown" — never guess.
conversation_idNoEcho the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed5 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • addedInput schema / properties / context
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Describe the user's underlying goal in one sentence — not the tool you are calling.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / conversation_id
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "Echo the conversation_id from the server's previous response. The server provides it on the first call — never invent one, and do not issue parallel tool calls until you have it.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • addedInput schema / properties / llm_model
      Added value: +{
      +  "description": "The exact model identifier you (the assistant) are running as, taken from your system prompt or environment (e.g. \"claude-opus-4-8\", \"gpt-5.2\"). Used for analytics only. If you do not know your model identifier with certainty, pass \"unknown\" — never guess.",
      +  "type": "string"
      +}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "url",
      -  "q"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "url",
      +  "q",
      +  "context",
      +  "llm_model"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  3. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  4. First observed

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety and live-web profile. The description adds that the result is LLM-generated, which is useful and sets expectations versus raw extraction, but it mostly restates the tool's purpose. It does not disclose edge behavior such as failure on unreachable pages or answer formatting, so the added value over annotations is modest.

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 sentences with zero filler; the core action and outcome are front-loaded. Every word earns its place and the description is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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?

For a simple question-answering tool, the fully-documented schema, the read-only/open-world annotations, and a description stating the LLM-generated answer outcome give the agent enough to choose and invoke it correctly. The only real gap is no explicit statement that the page is fetched live and may be inaccessible, but that is reasonably implied by the URL parameter and openWorldHint.

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 100% – q, url, context, llm_model, and conversation_id all have meaningful descriptions, including important rules like 'never guess' for llm_model and the conversation_id handshake. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond 'Accepts a URL', so the baseline 3 applies.

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 pairs a specific verb ('Ask') with a specific resource ('a specific web page') and clarifies the output is an LLM-generated answer. This distinctly separates it from sibling web tools like web_extract_run, web_crawl_run, and web_search_run, which extract raw content, crawl, or search rather than answer questions about a page.

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 conveys the core scenario — a natural-language question about one specific URL — but never names sibling alternatives (e.g., web_extract_run, web_search_run) or states when not to use it. With many sibling web_* tools plus an nl_ask_post sibling, selection guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool is clearly scoped to a specific platform and action (e.g., facebook_post_get vs instagram_post_get). Descriptions explicitly differentiate similar tools across platforms, and within-a-platform tools like tiktok_search_videos_list vs tiktok_search_hashtag_list have clear disambiguation notes.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 167 tools follow a strict `platform_resource_action` pattern (e.g., youtube_video_comments_list). No mixing of styles—snake_case throughout, with consistent verb ordering (get, list, search, etc.).

Tool Count2/5

The server has 167 tools, which is far beyond the typical well-scoped range of 3-15. While the broad multi-platform scope justifies many tools, this extreme number makes the tool surface overwhelming and difficult for an agent to navigate efficiently.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of platforms and operations including profile retrieval, post/video fetching, comments, search, transcripts, and ad library access. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no Facebook events or LinkedIn messaging), but the surface is comprehensive for a read-only data aggregation use case.