Skip to main content
Glama

Ranking algorithm volatility

keyword_metrics_volatility
Read-only

How much the store's ranking algorithm moved in one country over a period. High volatility means rank changes are the store's doing, not yours — check it before blaming a release. Costs 8 credits.

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": {
      "store": "<store>",
      "country": "<country>"
    },
    "name": "keyword_metrics_volatility"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoEnd date, YYYY-MM-DD.
fromNoStart date, YYYY-MM-DD.
storeYesWhich app store: "android" (Google Play) or "ios" (App Store).
countryYesTwo-letter ISO country code, e.g. "US", "GB", "DE".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations by stating the 8-credit cost and explaining how to interpret high volatility.

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?

The description is three short sentences, front-loads the purpose, and each sentence adds distinct value: what it measures, how to use the result, and the credit cost.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a read-only metric tool with full parameter descriptions and annotations, the definition covers purpose, interpretation, and cost. It does not describe the return value or scale, which is a minor gap given there is no output schema.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so store, country, from, and to are already fully documented. The description adds only a high-level suggestion of country and period scoping, which is already clear from the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific metric and scope: how much the store's ranking algorithm moved in one country over a period. The phrase 'in one country' implicitly distinguishes it from the worldwide sibling, but it does not name that alternative or explicitly restate the keyword-focused naming.

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 a clear use case: check volatility before attributing rank changes to a release. It does not explicitly say when not to use it or name keyword_metrics_volatility_worldwide as the alternative for multi-country analysis.

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.