Skip to main content
Glama

Agent Ready Website Audit

Draft schema markup (JSON-LD)

draft_schema_markup
Read-only

Drafts schema markup (schema.org JSON-LD structured data) for a page: Organization, WebSite, FAQPage (questions read from headings that end in a question mark, with the text under them) or LocalBusiness. Values the person gives win over values read from the page. Use it when seo_audit_page reports missing or incomplete structured data. result has jsonLd, scriptTag (ready to paste into the ), filledFrom (each field: input or page), missing (fields to fill in) and existingTypes (schema types the page already declares). Returns JSON: summary (one sentence), reportUrl (a shareable report page for the person, kept 30 days; null for tools that keep none) and result (the details below). Errors come back as one plain sentence. Recorded: the checked domain and path (never the query string), the tool, which checks failed and the app name; never an IP address or page text.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>",
      "type": "<type>"
    },
    "name": "draft_schema_markup"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesThe page the markup describes: an absolute http or https URL, such as https://example.com/pricing.
nameNoThe organization or site name. Defaults to the page's.
typeYesThe schema.org type to draft.
phoneNoLocalBusiness only: the phone. Defaults to the page's first tel: link.
sameAsNoOfficial profile URLs (LinkedIn, X, YouTube). Defaults to the social links on the page.
addressNoLocalBusiness only: the street address on one line.
logoUrlNoAn absolute logo image URL. Defaults to the page icon.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations, the description discloses the precedence rule ('Values the person gives win over values read from the page'), the full result shape (jsonLd, scriptTag, filledFrom, missing, existingTypes), the 30-day reportUrl retention, single-sentence error behavior, and what is and is not recorded (domain/path, never query string, IP, or page text). That is substantial behavioral context the annotations alone do not convey.

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?

Purpose and usage are front-loaded, and the sentences are information-dense rather than padded. Some of the return/recording boilerplate is generic and references 'the details below' despite there being no output schema, which slightly muddies the structure.

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?

With seven parameters, no output schema, and a drafting operation that mixes supplied and scraped values, the description covers the missing pieces: result field meanings, fallback semantics, error format, retention, and privacy recording scope. An agent has enough to call it correctly and interpret the response.

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, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the user-supplied-vs-page-derived precedence that governs every optional parameter, plus the FAQPage heading-scanning rule. The per-parameter defaults are already in the schema, so it does not exceed a 4.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Drafts schema markup (schema.org JSON-LD structured data) for a page') and enumerates the four supported types, including how FAQPage questions are derived from headings ending in a question mark. An agent can distinguish this from sibling drafting tools like draft_llms_txt or draft_robots_txt_for_ai_crawlers purely from the description.

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?

It gives an explicit triggering condition and names the upstream sibling: 'Use it when seo_audit_page reports missing or incomplete structured data.' There is no explicit when-not guidance or statement about what to do when the audit reports complete data, 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.

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources