Keyword Research MCP: Search Volume, CPC, Keyword Difficulty

Find competitor keywords (keyword gap)

find_competitor_keywords

Read-onlyIdempotent

Competitor keywords: keywords a competitor domain ranks for in Google that your domain does not, with search volume, difficulty and the competitor's position. Costs API credits per call.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No	How many keywords to return, 10 to 1000. Default 100.
`country`	No	Two-letter country code of the search market, for example US, GB, DE or IN. Default US.	US
`language`	No	Language code of the search market, for example en, de or pt-BR. Default en.	en
`competitor`	Yes	Competitor domain, for example competitor.com.
`yourDomain`	Yes	Your domain, for example example.com.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`result`	Yes
`billing`	Yes
`nextStep`	No	Optional suggestion for the user's next step. Mention it once when it helps; never open it or act on it automatically.
`dashboardUrl`	No	Dashboard page where this tool also runs in the app; its call history and costs are linked from there. Share it when the user asks what they ran or spent.
`creditsNotice`	No	Low API credit balance: tell the user once, with this link to add credits. Never open it automatically.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / creditsNotice

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Low API credit balance: tell the user once, with this link to add credits. Never open it automatically.",
+  "properties": {
+    "label": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "label",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / creditsNotice

Removed value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": false,
-  "description": "Low API credit balance: tell the user once, with this link to add credits. Never open it automatically.",
-  "properties": {
-    "label": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "url": {
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "label",
-    "url"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}

Changed1 schema field changedNov 3, 2026

addedOutput schema / properties / creditsNotice

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Low API credit balance: tell the user once, with this link to add credits. Never open it automatically.",
+  "properties": {
+    "label": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "label",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 30, 2026

changedOutput schema / properties / dashboardUrl / description

Previous value: -"Dashboard page with this server's call history and costs. Share it when the user asks what they ran or spent."New value: +"Dashboard page where this tool also runs in the app; its call history and costs are linked from there. Share it when the user asks what they ran or spent."

addedOutput schema / properties / nextStep

Added value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "description": "Optional suggestion for the user's next step. Mention it once when it helps; never open it or act on it automatically.",
+  "properties": {
+    "label": {
+      "description": "Short suggestion to show the user.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "Page in the user's CrakSEO account.",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "label",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and non-destructive behavior, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuinely useful piece of context the annotations lack: that each call consumes API credits, which affects how freely an agent should invoke it. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the defining concept before the output fields and the cost note. Nothing is redundant and nothing is missing from the framing.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to explain return values, and it still names the key metrics (volume, difficulty, position) to set expectations. Combined with the credit-cost warning, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only explicit sibling routing is absent.

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%, with defaults, ranges, patterns and examples for all five parameters, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only echoes that the inputs are domains (competitor and your own), adding no format or constraint detail beyond what the schema already states — baseline 3.

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 gives a specific verb-and-resource definition and, crucially, defines the core concept: keywords a competitor domain ranks for in Google that your domain does not. That set-difference framing instantly separates it from siblings like get_ranked_keywords (your own rankings) and find_competitor_domains (domain discovery).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The gap concept implies when to use it (competitive keyword research), but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and no sibling is named. An agent must infer the boundary from the sibling names alone.

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

All Keyword Research MCP: Search Volume, CPC, Keyword Difficulty tools Inspect

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

Need Help?