How to Choose Response Header Tools
Response-header diagnostics become faster when you follow a two-step path: full snapshot first, then header-specific deep checks.
First tool by symptom
- Need a full structured breakdown first → Response Headers Parser
- Need retry wait interpretation for 429/503 → Retry-After Inspect
- Need latency contributor clues → Server-Timing Inspect
- Need preload/canonical/next/prev checks → Link Header Inspect
- Need MIME + nosniff validation → Content-Type Inspect + X-Content-Type-Options Inspect
Tool role map
- HTTP Header Parser: entry point for raw header blocks
- Response Headers Parser: normalize complete response headers
- Retry-After Inspect: interpret retry timing (seconds/date)
- Server-Timing Inspect: break down timing metrics for latency clues
- Link Header Inspect: validate rel/as/type/crossorigin consistency
- Content-Type + X-Content-Type-Options Inspect: validate MIME declarations with nosniff
Recommended practical flow
- 1) Parse full headers with Response Headers Parser and identify target fields
- 2) Branch into header-specific tools (Retry-After/Server-Timing/Link/Content-Type)
- 3) Combine with HTTP Status Inspect when status context matters
- 4) Re-fetch the same URL after changes and verify expected diffs
Collection set for investigation
- Response headers from the same URL at failure time
- HTTP status, Date, and Retry-After when relevant
- Raw Server-Timing values (keep exact formatting)
- Actual values for Content-Type, X-Content-Type-Options, and Link
Compared tools
- HTTP Header Parser
- Response Headers Parser
- Retry-After Inspect
- Server-Timing Inspect
- Link Header Inspect
- Content-Type Inspect
- X-Content-Type-Options Inspect
- HTTP Status Inspect
Frequent cases
- Clients retry immediately on 429 because Retry-After is not interpreted
- Server-Timing exists but latency source remains unclear due to weak metric design
- Preload appears ineffective due to Link as/crossorigin mismatch
- nosniff is present but wrong Content-Type still breaks rendering
Common mistakes
- Checking a single header while ignoring status and surrounding headers
- Treating Retry-After seconds as milliseconds
- Overexposing internal details in Server-Timing desc
- Relying on nosniff alone without fixing Content-Type correctness
FAQ
- How is Response Headers Parser different from HTTP Header Parser?
- HTTP Header Parser is the raw-header entry point; Response Headers Parser is optimized for response-centric structuring and next actions.
- When should I branch into specialized tools?
- Once the target header is identified (Retry-After, Server-Timing, Link, Content-Type), move to the dedicated tool for deeper checks.
Referenced specs
Next to view (diagnostic order)
These links are generated from site_map rules in recommended diagnostic order.
- HTTP Header Parser — Parse raw headers into structured lists
- Response Headers Parser — Parse response headers into structured data
- Retry-After Inspect — Parse Retry-After and inspect retry wait behavior
- Server-Timing Inspect — Parse Server-Timing and inspect latency metrics
- Link Header Inspect — Parse Link headers and inspect rel/as/type
- Content-Type Inspect — Parse Content-Type and inspect MIME/charset
- X-Content-Type-Options Inspect — Parse X-Content-Type-Options and validate nosniff
- HTTP Status Inspect — Analyze HTTP status codes and suggest handling direction