Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SEO and Keyword Data API

by com.duoleads.keywords
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Backlink profile summary

backlinks_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Backlink profile of a domain: domain rank (0-1000), backlinks, referring domains, main domains, IPs and subnets, nofollow and broken links, spam score, first seen, and breakdowns by link type, TLD and country, from a web link index, in one $0.048 call. Use when you need a site's link authority at a glance. A domain with no links is an answer with zeros or no counts, which is still charged. Bad input is a free 400; a data source failure is not charged. Price: $0.048 per successful call, paid over x402 (USDC on Base); pass the payment in _meta["x402/payment"].

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": {
      "target": "<target>"
    },
    "name": "backlinks_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesA domain like example.com (subdomains allowed). A site-root URL such as https://www.example.com/ is reduced to the domain; a path or port is refused.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Previous value: -"A bare domain like example.com (no scheme, path or port; subdomains allowed)."New value: +"A domain like example.com (subdomains allowed). A site-root URL such as https://www.example.com/ is reduced to the domain; a path or port is refused."
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations, it discloses billing semantics that matter operationally: a zero-link domain is still charged, a bad input returns a free 400, and a data source failure is not charged. It also states the price and the x402 payment mechanism, which the annotations cannot 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?

The metric enumeration is front-loaded and dense but each item earns its place by telling the agent what comes back in the absence of an output schema. The pricing/payment sentences are necessary but slightly tacked on at the end.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by listing the returned fields, and it covers cost, failure modes, and payment. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and to interpret the result.

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% and the single 'target' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including URL normalization and path/port rejection. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific resource (backlink profile of a domain) and enumerates the exact metrics returned: domain rank, backlinks, referring domains, IPs/subnets, spam score, and breakdowns by link type, TLD and country. This clearly separates it from list-oriented siblings like backlinks_list or backlink_anchors, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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: 'Use when you need a site's link authority at a glance,' which tells the agent this is the summary/overview entry point. It stops short of explicit exclusions or naming the alternative tools for drill-down (anchors, history, full link list).

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

All SEO and Keyword Data API 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