Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Howseen

by ai.howseen
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Get the technical site audit

get_site_audit
Read-only

Technical GEO/SEO audit of the brand's website, as the dashboard Technical audit shows it: every check (indexable, robots.txt, sitemap.xml, llms.txt, server rendering, Bing, structured data, canonical, trust signals), every issue with its severity and score gain, the steps for the site's CMS and the exact text to paste (robots.txt, llms.txt, JSON-LD, meta tags...), plus the problems found on the pages that serve the tracked questions. Use it when the user asks "what should I fix on my site" or for code to add. The last audit (refreshed weekly) is returned; refresh: true re-crawls now (up to about a minute, a few per hour).

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "get_site_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoLanguage of the texts (default en).
brandNoBrand id, name or domain (from list_brands). Optional when the account has a single brand.
refreshNotrue = crawl the site again now instead of reading the last audit.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description usefully adds that results are a cached weekly audit and that refresh triggers an immediate crawl costing up to about a minute with a few-per-hour limit. However, it does not mention that refresh causes a real site crawl (a side effect beyond pure reading) or what happens if the crawl fails or is rate-limited.

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?

One front-loaded paragraph that opens with the resource and its contents, then the use case, then the caching/refresh constraint. The parenthetical lists are dense but each item adds retrieval value, and nothing is repeated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by enumerating the returned sections (checks, issues with severity and score gain, CMS steps, paste-ready snippets, page problems). With only three fully-documented optional parameters and annotations covering safety, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description earns the extra point by explaining refresh semantics (re-crawl now, ~1 minute, a few per hour) that the schema only states as "crawl the site again now". lang and brand are left entirely to the schema, but that is acceptable at full coverage.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (technical GEO/SEO audit of the brand's website) and enumerates exactly what the output contains: every check, every issue with severity and score gain, CMS steps, paste-ready text, and page-level problems. This is far more specific than siblings like list_site_pages or get_action_plan, so an agent can tell them apart without opening schemas.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger ("what should I fix on my site" or a request for code to add) and clarifies the refresh economics: the last weekly audit is returned by default, refresh:true re-crawls now. It never names a competing sibling to route away from, which keeps it short of a 5.

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

All Howseen toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources