MCP.Market

webfetch MCP server

by firish·io.github.firish/webfetch·v0.1.3·60 stars

Self-hosted web search for LLM agents: search -> fetch -> rank pipeline with semantic caching

C65/100grade C
What users say
No reviews yet
Be the first
Safety scan
C65/100

full report

Adoption
Growing

60 stars34 downloads/wk

Reviews

Write one

Nobody has reviewed webfetch yet.

If you have run it, two minutes of your experience saves the next person an afternoon.

webfetch tools (5)

write = sends, deletes, buys or posts

Read from the package source without running it. The installed server may list more.

  • fetch_url

    Fetch one page's full extracted text under a budget.

  • save_finding

    Cache a fact learned outside web_search, marked unverified.

  • savings_report

    What webfetch has saved vs hosted web-search pricing: this session (since the server started) plus the lifetime total.

  • status

    Setup status: which search engines have keys and will serve, which optional features are on or degraded, cache location, and the env-var configuration surface.

  • web_search

    Search the web and return ranked, source-labeled excerpts.

Public scan report

scanner v0.1.10 · 2026-11-07 · same rubric, same numbers if you re-run it

1 medium
  • Code scan59 source files scanned20/25
  • –Live reliabilityno gateway calls yet and no remote to proben/a
  • –Tool poisoningtools not inspected (local package is not executed); not countedn/a
  • Auth qualitystatic API keys via environment variables6/15
  • Maintenancelast push 107 days ago8/15
  • Maintainer identityregistry namespace matches repository owner; GitHub account older than a year8/10

Findings (1)

  • mediumeval / new Function usedexec.eval
    webfetch_llm-0.1.3/evals/run_matcher_eval.py: …""" Layer 1: offline semantic-matcher eval (no network beyond model downloads). Ans…
Overall 65/100. Components that don't apply are left out of the denominator. Any critical finding is an F.RubricAppeal a findingJSON

How webfetch compares

Against every graded SEO MCP server, from our own scans and uptime checks. Updated after each scan run.

Safety score
65/100
higher than 20% of 769 SEO servers
Tools
5
the typical SEO server has 7
Tools that change things
0%
typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break
GitHub stars
60
more than 95% of 408 SEO servers
Downloads a week
34
more than 13% of 204 SEO servers with a package

What its tools let an agent do: 4 read · 1 create

Install webfetch in Claude Code, Cursor or VS Code

claude mcp add webfetch -- uvx webfetch-llm
Add to Cursor

What the publisher says

From the webfetch repository's README, as published. We do not edit it. Read it on GitHub

webfetch

<!-- mcp-name: io.github.firish/webfetch -->

Web search for LLM agents that you run yourself - up to 8x fewer input tokens and 3x lower cost than hosted web_search, at the same accuracy.

Hosted web-search tools charge $10 per thousand searches and then bill you again for every token of retrieved content they push into your context window. webfetch replaces them with a local pipeline - multi-engine search, page fetching and extraction, semantic reranking, sentence-level compression - exposed as a web_search tool your model calls like any other. And unlike every hosted tool and search API we surveyed, repeated and paraphrased queries are served from a semantic cache for free.

(Install with pip install webfetch-llm; the import name is webfetch.)

Jump to: The headline · What you get · Getting started · Check your setup · Full benchmark results · Claude Code · Agent loop · Savings report · How it works · Caveats

Same accuracy. A third of the cost. An eighth of the tokens.

One agent loop, one model, one judge, 50 SimpleQA questions. The only thing that changes between rows is the search tool:

Swap Opus for gpt-5.6-sol and the same webfetch tool hits 96% - hosted parity - at $0.040/query and 2,156 tokens: an eighth of what the hosted tool pushes into your context. Full results cover every arm we ran.

These numbers are the WORST case for webfetch - measured on an empty cache. In real use the gap widens on its own: repeats and rewords serve from cache for free, and the token advantage is paid again on every later turn that keeps search results in context. It adds up to receipts like this one, from an ordinary Claude Code session:

Every claim in this README is generated by an eval harness that ships in this repo - the question sets, per-question records, judging protocol, and the negative results are all in evals/, and every table can be regenerated with one command. Don't take our word for the grading: evals/results/README.md maps every table row to the raw result file that produced it, down to per-question judge verdicts.

What you get

A search pipeline you own (4-engine RRF fusion, local extraction, sentence-level compression). Results come from reciprocal-rank fusion across DuckDuckGo, Brave, Serper, and Tavily - whichever of them you have keys for. DDG needs no key, so the tool works at literally zero cost out of the box; every key you add joins the fusion automatically. Pages are fetched and extracted locally (trafilatura, readability, newspaper4k, Playwright rendering for JS pages and 403 walls), chunked, ranked by a hybrid BM25 + bi-encoder cascade with a cross-encoder on top, then compressed to the sentences that answer the query - measured 50% fewer tokens at zero recall loss.

Shortened. The full README is on GitHub.

Nothing above is checked by us. What we check is on the safety report.

Grade history

  • 2026-11-07downgradeB → Cscore 65: eval / new Function used

webfetch: common questions

Is webfetch MCP server safe?
With care: it is graded C, so read the findings first (65/100). Read the webfetch safety report
How do I install webfetch?
It runs on your machine. Copy the Claude Code, Cursor, VS Code or Claude Desktop config from the install section.
Does webfetch need an API key?
Yes. The registry entry asks for BRAVE_API_KEY, SERPER_API_KEY, TAVILY_API_KEY.
Is webfetch maintained?
The last commit was 116 days ago (2026-07-23). The latest release is v0.1.3.
What can I use instead of webfetch?
Servers from other publishers that do the same job: SEO Tools: A-Parser bridge MCP server, Open SEO Crawler MCP server and Librecrawl — Technical SEO Audit MCP Server.
How does webfetch compare with other SEO MCP servers?
safety score 65/100 (higher than 20% of 769 SEO servers); tools 5 (the typical SEO server has 7); tools that change things 0% (typical: 0%. Fewer write tools means less an agent can break). Full comparison.

Alternatives to webfetch

Same job from other publishers: the closest match first, then the best rated.

  • SEO Tools: A-Parser bridge
    Bridge to a self-hosted A-Parser: SERP, suggests and 150+ parsers via its API (read-only).
    B
  • Open SEO Crawler
    Self-hosted SEO crawler: run site audits and AI crawler checks, then read the issues and pages.
    A
  • Librecrawl — Technical SEO Audit MCP Server
    Self-hosted technical SEO audit MCP. 50+ checks, WAF detection, ephemeral. Built on LibreCrawl.
    B
  • Snapdec
    Snap decisions for coding agents: local or hosted classify/check/score/rank via MCP.
    A
  • three.ws Signals
    Discover signal feeds ranked by proven edge, rank publishers, and subscribe + track results.
    B