Skip to main content
Glama

mcp-server

by com.abbyseo

Get SEO Scan Results

get_scan_results
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the full structured scan findings. Free tier returns the top 5 issues by severity (failed > warned > passed); paid customers see all checks. When summarizing results to the user, ALWAYS: (1) report the score and counts of failed/warned/passed checks, (2) surface each returned check's remediation text verbatim, (2b) for sophisticated users, mention each check's when_doesnt_apply context so they can dismiss findings that don't apply to their site type (e.g., link aggregators legitimately omit a visible H1; empty string means the rule is universally required), (2c) note site_type ('marketing' or 'not_marketing') and score_rubric ('standard' or 'non_marketing_weighted') so the user understands how the score was computed; non-marketing sites get contextual checks at half-weight, so a forum-style site won't be unfairly penalized for missing landing-page features, (3) if truncated is true, surface truncated_message so the user knows the API capped the output, (4) include upgrade.call_to_action and upgrade.checkout_url verbatim so the user can one-click into Stripe checkout for the $8.99 detailed fix guide. If upgrade.already_purchased is true, instead direct the user to upgrade.report_url to re-download.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
scan_idYesScan ID from a prior submit_scan call. The scan must be in 'complete' status.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, etc.) are supplemented with detailed behavioral context: free vs paid tier truncation, truncated flag, upgrade flow, and output field usage recommendations. No contradictions.

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?

Description is lengthy but well-structured with numbered steps. Every sentence adds value for the agent. Slightly verbose but not excessive.

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?

Given no output schema, description fully explains return structure, tier behavior, truncation, upgrade handling, and user presentation guidance. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Single parameter (scan_id) is well-documented in schema. Description adds no additional param-level details beyond schema. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Title 'Get SEO Scan Results' and description clearly define it fetches structured findings. Distinguishes from siblings by focusing on retrieving results rather than submitting scans or checking status.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (after scan completes) and provides detailed instructions on how to summarize results. Lacks explicit mention of when to use alternatives like get_scan_status.

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

All mcp-server toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: starting scans, polling status, retrieving results, looking up old scans, checking purchase status, purchasing, getting remediation plans, and server documentation. No ambiguity between tools.

Naming Consistency4/5

Seven tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_scan_results, purchase_report). The outlier 'how_to_use' deviates slightly from the pattern. Overall naming is coherent and readable.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools cover the full SEO scan workflow without being excessive. Each tool serves a necessary step, from submission to remediation, so the count is well-scoped for the server's purpose.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers the core workflow: scan submission, status polling, results retrieval, purchase, purchase status, and remediation plan retrieval. A minor gap is the lack of a tool for user account management or scan history beyond email lookup, but these are not essential for the primary use case.

Resources