Which integrations are available for this server?

Allows integration with the OpenAI Agents SDK for web scraping, crawling, and search.

How do I use MCP Firecrawl?

1. Click on "Install Server". 2. Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state. 3. In the chat, type @ followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCP Firecrawl Search for recent advancements in quantum computing" That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed. Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.

MCP Firecrawl

by mustafamemon265789-cloud

Overview Schema Related Servers Score Discussions

TypeScript

Remote

MCP Firecrawl

Node.js TypeScript MCP Firecrawl License: MIT

A production-ready Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that integrates with the Firecrawl API to give AI assistants the power to scrape, crawl, and search the web.

Works with Claude Desktop, Cursor, VS Code (Cline/Roo Code), Continue, OpenAI Agents SDK, and any other MCP-compatible AI tool.

Features

Tool	Description	Input
`scrape_url`	Scrape any webpage → returns clean Markdown content + metadata	`{ "url": "https://..." }`
`crawl_website`	Crawl multiple pages (up to 100) from a website	`{ "url": "https://...", "limit": 10 }`
`search_web`	Search the web using Firecrawl's search engine	`{ "query": "latest AI news" }`

Related MCP server: WebSearch

Quick Start

# 1. Clone
git clone https://github.com/YOUR_USERNAME/MCP.git
cd MCP

# 2. Install
npm install

# 3. Configure
cp .env.example .env
# Edit .env → add your Firecrawl API key:
# FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=fc-your-key-here

# 4. Build & Run
npm run build
npm start

✅ Server is now running on stdio (default mode).

Usage

Command Line Test

# List available tools
node test-mcp.mjs tools

# Scrape a website
node test-mcp.mjs scrape https://example.com

# Search the web
node test-mcp.mjs search "latest TypeScript news"

With OpenAI Agents SDK (TypeScript)

import { Agent, run, MCPServerStdio } from "@openai/agents";

const mcp = new MCPServerStdio({
  name: "Firecrawl",
  fullCommand: "node dist/server.js",
  env: { FIRECRAWL_API_KEY: "fc-..." },
});

await mcp.connect();

const agent = new Agent({
  name: "Web Assistant",
  instructions: "Use tools to scrape, crawl, and search the web.",
  mcpServers: [mcp],
});

const result = await run(agent, "Scrape https://example.com");
console.log(result.finalOutput);
await mcp.close();

Integration with AI Tools

Claude Desktop

Add to %APPDATA%\Claude\claude_desktop_config.json:

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "firecrawl": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["C:/path/to/MCP/dist/server.js"],
      "env": {
        "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "fc-..."
      }
    }
  }
}

Cursor

Settings → Features → MCP → Add Server:

Name: firecrawl
Type: command
Command: node "C:/path/to/MCP/dist/server.js"
Environment: FIRECRAWL_API_KEY=fc-...

VS Code + Cline / Roo Code

File: .vscode/cline_mcp_settings.json

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "firecrawl": {
      "command": "node",
      "args": ["C:/path/to/MCP/dist/server.js"],
      "env": { "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "fc-..." },
      "disabled": false,
      "autoApprove": []
    }
  }
}

Continue (VS Code / JetBrains)

File: ~/.continue/config.json

{
  "experimental": {
    "mcpServers": {
      "firecrawl": {
        "command": "node",
        "args": ["C:/path/to/MCP/dist/server.js"],
        "env": { "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "fc-..." }
      }
    }
  }
}

opencode

File: ./opencode.json

{
  "mcp": {
    "firecrawl": {
      "type": "local",
      "command": ["node", "MCP/dist/server.js"],
      "enabled": true,
      "env": { "FIRECRAWL_API_KEY": "fc-..." }
    }
  }
}

HTTP Mode (Streamable HTTP)

Can't use stdio? Run the server as an HTTP endpoint instead:

npm run start:http
# Listening on http://127.0.0.1:3001/mcp

Then connect any MCP client to that URL.

Project Structure

MCP/
├── src/
│   ├── server.ts              # Entry point (stdio + HTTP modes)
│   ├── tools/
│   │   ├── scrape.ts          # scrape_url tool
│   │   ├── crawl.ts           # crawl_website tool
│   │   └── search.ts          # search_web tool
│   ├── services/
│   │   └── firecrawl.ts       # FirecrawlApp API wrapper
│   └── types/
│       └── index.ts           # TypeScript interfaces
├── test-mcp.mjs               # CLI test utility
├── .env.example               # Environment template
├── package.json
├── tsconfig.json
└── README.md

Environment Variables

Variable	Required	Default	Description
`FIRECRAWL_API_KEY`	✅ Yes	—	Your Firecrawl API key
`HTTP_HOST`	❌ No	`127.0.0.1`	HTTP bind address (HTTP mode only)
`HTTP_PORT`	❌ No	`3001`	HTTP port (HTTP mode only)

NPM Scripts

Script	Description
`npm run build`	Compile TypeScript → `dist/`
`npm start`	Run in stdio mode
`npm run start:http`	Run in HTTP mode
`npm run dev`	Run with hot-reload (stdio)
`npm run dev:http`	Run with hot-reload (HTTP)
`npm run clean`	Delete `dist/`

Tech Stack

Runtime: Node.js 18+
Language: TypeScript
MCP SDK: @modelcontextprotocol/sdk
Scraping Engine: firecrawl SDK
Validation: zod
Config: dotenv

Requirements

Node.js 18 or higher
A Firecrawl API key (free tier available)

License

MIT

Available Tools

3 tools

crawl_websiteA

Crawl multiple pages from a website and return extracted markdown content

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The starting URL to crawl
`limit`	No	Maximum number of pages to crawl (1–100)

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose key behavioral traits such as rate limits, robots.txt compliance, domain restrictions, or how links are followed. The agent lacks critical information about safety and limitations.

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 a single clear sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating purpose and output format.

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?

The description lacks completeness for a crawling tool: no mention of scope (e.g., same domain only), depth, handling of dynamic content, or output format details. No output schema exacerbates the gap, and the description fails to provide necessary behavioral 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains the parameters. The description adds general context (multiple pages, markdown output) but does not provide additional parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema offers.

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?

Description clearly states the tool crawls multiple pages and returns markdown content. It uses a specific verb (crawl) and resource (website), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings: scrape_url (single page) and search_web (search, not crawl).

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 implies when to use: for crawling multiple pages from a website. It does not explicitly exclude single-page use or name alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer.

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

scrape_urlA

Scrape a single webpage and return clean markdown content with metadata

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes	The URL of the webpage to scrape

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It specifies output format but lacks details on rate limits, authentication, error handling, or limitations (e.g., JavaScript rendering). Agent has limited insight into operational constraints.

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?

Single sentence, concise and front-loaded with action. No wasted words. Could benefit from slight elaboration on metadata but remains 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 simple tool (1 param, no output schema, no nested objects), description adequately covers purpose and output. Slight gap on metadata content but not critical for selection.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter url, already described as 'The URL of the webpage to scrape'. Description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning baseline 3.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'scrape', resource 'single webpage', and output 'clean markdown content with metadata'. This distinguishes from sibling tools: crawl_website (multiple pages) and search_web (search results).

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?

Implied usage for single-page scraping but no explicit when to use or alternatives provided. Does not reference sibling tools or specify when to choose this over crawl_website or search_web.

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

search_webB

Search the web using Firecrawl and return relevant results with content summaries

ParametersJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`query`	Yes	The search query

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden but only says 'search the web' and 'return relevant results with content summaries'. It does not disclose potential rate limits, query length constraints (though in schema), or whether the tool is read-only.

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?

Single sentence that is front-loaded with the key action ('Search the web'). No extraneous words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It mentions the return format (content summaries), which is helpful. However, it could briefly note that results are limited to snippets.

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 coverage is 100% with the parameter 'query' described as 'The search query'. The description repeats the verb but adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, keeping the score at baseline 3.

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 tool searches the web using Firecrawl and returns results with summaries. This distinguishes it from siblings crawl_website and scrape_url, which focus on specific sites or URLs.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. For example, it does not specify that this is for broad web searches whereas crawl_website is for crawling a specific domain.

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. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

3 tool updatesv1.0.0Jul 13, 2026
- First observedcrawl_website
- First observedscrape_url
- First observedsearch_web

Install Server

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct action: crawling multiple pages, scraping a single page, and searching the web. There is no overlap in purpose.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using snake_case: crawl_website, scrape_url, search_web.

Tool Count4/5

3 tools is slightly lean but covers the core web extraction tasks. More tools could be added (e.g., for authentication), but the set is scoped appropriately.

Completeness4/5

The tools cover the primary operations: crawling, scraping, and searching. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool for custom headers), but the surface is functional for typical use cases.

Maintenance

ActivityStale

ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

GitHub Repository

Need Help?

Related Servers

Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.

Looking for Admin?

If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.

Related MCP Connectors

hithereiamaliff-mcp-nextcloudOAuth
ai.smithery
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Cloud Storage File Systems Workplace & Productivity
237
Firecrawl A
io.github.pipeworx-io
Firecrawl MCP — wraps the Firecrawl API (firecrawl.dev) for web
Web Scraping Browser Automation
3431
MESSORA A
dev.messora
Scrape, crawl and search the web for AI agents via MCP.
Web Scraping Browser Automation Search
51
Keenable Web Search A
ai.keenable.api
Docs: https://docs.keenable.ai/mcp-server Keenable is a free, remote MCP server that gives agents access to the web index. Search the web with ranked results and date/site filters, then fetch any indexed page as clean markdown. Works out of the box with no account or API key.
Research & Data Search Web Scraping
23

Related MCP Servers

firecrawl-mcp-server
RAG Systems Web Scraping
firecrawl
A
license
A
quality
C
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server implementation that integrates with FireCrawl for advanced web scraping capabilities.
Updated 2 days ago (2026-09-05 00:05 UTC)
26
40,139
7,395
MIT
WebSearch
Web Scraping Browser Automation Search
josemartinrodriguezmortaloni
F
license
C
quality
C
maintenance
Built as a Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides advanced web search, content extraction, web crawling, and scraping capabilities using the Firecrawl API.
Updated 3 months ago (2026-06-17 03:44 UTC)
4
1
-
OneSearch MCP Server
Browser Automation Web Scraping Search
yokingma
A
license
A
quality
A
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enables web search, scraping, crawling, and content extraction through multiple engines including SearXNG, Firecrawl, and Tavily.
Updated a month ago (2026-07-31 01:37 UTC)
4
190
139
MIT
Firecrawl MCP Server
Web Scraping RAG Systems Browser Automation
mcma123
A
license
B
quality
D
maintenance
A Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to perform advanced web scraping, crawling, searching, and data extraction through the Firecrawl API.
Updated a year ago (2025-03-10 04:55 UTC)
9
40,139
MIT

Latest Blog Posts

Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 25, 2026.
mcp
Agent Identity
OAuth 2.1
Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an Intern
By Om-Shree-0709 on July 2, 2026.
Agent Identity
MCP Security
OAuth Delegation
Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)
By Om-Shree-0709 on June 30, 2026.
Agentic Ai
Prompt Injection
WebAssembly

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/mustafamemon265789-cloud/MCP'

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