Check website status codes for multiple URLs at once. Find broken links, redirects, timeouts, and final destinations without leaving your browser.
An HTTP status checker sends a request to a URL and reports the three-digit response code the server returns: 200 for a working page, 301 or 302 for a redirect, 404 for a missing page, 500 for a server error. A bulk HTTP status checker does the same thing across dozens or hundreds of URLs at once.
Testing URLs one at a time is fine for a handful of links. When you are auditing a migration, checking a documentation site before a launch, or verifying that a list of API endpoints is responding correctly, you need batch processing. Paste the list, run one check, and get the full picture.
This tool also follows redirect chains and shows the final destination for each URL, so you can tell at a glance whether a 301 lands where it is supposed to.
URLs fail in boring ways. A page redirects twice when it should redirect once. A launch link returns 404 because the slug changed. A health check looks fine in the browser, but a bot user agent gets something different. These are small issues until they stack up.
A bulk HTTP status checker makes those problems visible fast. Instead of testing one page at a time, you can run a batch and see which URLs return 200, which ones redirect, which ones time out, and which ones are simply broken.
I have seen teams spend more time guessing at redirect behavior than fixing it. A clear status report ends that loop quickly.
This tool is built to answer the questions that matter during debugging:
That makes this tool useful as a broken link checker, a redirect checker, and a lightweight endpoint health check in one place.
Check URLs to run the batch.This tool is especially helpful after URL migrations, internal link audits, documentation moves, and infrastructure changes where redirect rules are easy to get wrong.
Not every non-200 response is equally bad. You need the right interpretation before you decide whether to ignore it, fix it, or escalate it.
| Code range | Meaning | Typical action |
|---|---|---|
| 2xx | The request succeeded. | Usually healthy. Confirm the final URL is the one you expect. |
| 3xx | The URL redirected somewhere else. | Check for extra hops, wrong destinations, or temporary redirects used by mistake. |
| 4xx | The request failed on the client side. | Fix links, slugs, access rules, or missing resources. |
| 5xx | The server failed to handle the request. | Check infrastructure, logs, upstream dependencies, and deployment health. |
That is why a plain “works” or “doesn’t work” check is not enough. A useful URL status tester tells you what kind of failure you are looking at.
Searchers often want a broken link checker, but in practice they usually need both link failure detection and redirect inspection.
| Check type | What it catches | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Broken link checker | 404s, 410s, DNS failures, SSL errors, timeouts. | Stops users and bots from hitting dead ends. |
| Redirect checker | 301s, 302s, redirect chains, redirect loops, wrong final destinations. | Prevents wasted latency and bad migration behavior. |
| Status code online lookup | Quick response validation across environments or user agents. | Useful during release checks and API debugging. |
A redirect is not always a problem. A redirect chain is. If URL A goes to B, and B goes to C, every extra hop adds latency and more room for configuration drift. The request still resolves, so teams often ignore it until they see the performance cost or a broken final destination.
This tool shows the redirect count so you can see that hidden overhead immediately. One clean redirect is manageable. Three hops on important links is a maintenance smell.
Slow redirects waste time. Long redirect chains waste confidence.
Some sites return different responses depending on the user agent. That can be intentional, but it can also expose broken bot handling, over-aggressive blocking, or accidental middleware behavior.
That is one reason this tool includes user agent options instead of only running a single generic request.
404 or 410
The resource is gone or the URL is wrong. Check recent slug changes, deleted pages, and stale internal links.
403
The server understood the request but refused it. This often points to bot blocking, WAF rules, or private resources being checked publicly.
Timeout or DNS failure
The request did not resolve cleanly. Look at DNS, TLS, upstream routing, or temporary infra instability.
Too many redirects
You likely have a redirect loop or a chain that never stabilizes. Audit your redirect rules before shipping more changes.
HTTP status checks are often the first pass before deeper investigation. You confirm whether the target URL is alive, whether it redirects, and whether bots see a different response. Then you move into page inspection, content extraction, or session-level automation if the surface check looks wrong.
If you are debugging live browser flows, Browserbeam’s docs show what to do after the status code check. The faster you confirm transport-level behavior, the faster you can focus on the page itself.
An HTTP status checker sends a request to a URL and reports the response code, such as 200, 301, 404, or 500. A bulk HTTP status checker repeats that process across many URLs so you can review failures and redirects quickly.
Paste one URL per line into this tool, then run the check. You will get a table with status codes, redirect counts, final URLs, timing, and any transport-level errors.
Both are redirects, but they signal different intent. A 301 is permanent. A 302 is temporary. If you are migrating URLs and the change is meant to stick, you usually want 301, not 302.
Broken links create dead ends for users and bots. They also make migrations and docs maintenance harder to trust. A broken link checker catches those failures before they spread through your site, changelog, or support docs.
That usually means the origin or security layer treats user agents differently. Bot-specific blocking, caching rules, or middleware can produce different results for Googlebot or Bingbot than for a normal browser.
There is no universal threshold, but very slow responses deserve attention, especially if they are tied to redirects or unstable infrastructure. A response that succeeds but takes too long can still degrade user experience and reliability.
Yes. Site migrations are one of the best use cases for this tool. You can batch-check old URLs, confirm they resolve correctly, and catch redirect chains or dead endpoints before they turn into larger cleanup work.
Structured page data instead of raw HTML. Your agent processes less, decides faster, and costs less to run.