Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SEO and Keyword Data API

by com.duoleads.keywords
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Domains ranking for a keyword set (up to 100)

serp_competitors
Read-onlyIdempotent

SERP competitors: the domains that rank in Google for a set of up to 100 keywords, each with average and median position, visibility, estimated traffic and how many of the keywords it ranks for; up to 100 domains in one $0.048 call. Use when you need who owns the search results of a topic. No data returns empty results (still charged). Bad input is free; upstream errors are 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": {
      "keywords": "<keywords>"
    },
    "name": "serp_competitors"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum domains to return (1-100). Defaults to 20.
countryNoOptional ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code or country name, used when locationCode is absent (uk = gb).
keywordsYesKeywords whose Google results to analyse (1-100; each at most 80 characters, normalised to lower case; one that is then empty, over 10 words or over 80 characters is listed in missing).
languageCodeNoLanguage code (2-letter). Defaults to en. An unsupported location falls back to 2840 (United States) with en (or the requested language if the United States offers it); a supported location with a language it does not offer uses that location's default language (en if offered). Either way market.fallback is true and market.warnings says what was used.
locationCodeNoGoogle Ads location code (geo target ID). Defaults to 2840 (United States); an unsupported code falls back to 2840 (United States, market.fallback).

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. Added

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only/open-world/idempotent, and the description adds substantial behavior beyond them: exact cost ($0.048), the charging rules (empty results still charged, bad input free, upstream errors not charged), the payment mechanism via _meta["x402/payment"], and the 100-domain result cap. These are material facts an agent cannot infer from the schema or annotations.

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 resource and scope are front-loaded in the opening clause, and the pricing/error sentences are short and scannable. Minor redundancy: the $0.048 figure is stated twice and the call is framed as one dense run-on before the shorter sentences, but nothing is wasted overall.

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 still enumerates the returned fields, and it covers cost, payment flow, charge conditions and result limits. Combined with the fully documented schema (defaults, fallbacks, normalization), an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and predict the cost.

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 every parameter including limit, country, locationCode, languageCode and keywords is already documented with defaults and fallback behavior. The description only echoes the 100-keyword and 100-domain bounds, adding essentially no semantics the schema lacks. Baseline 3 applies when the schema carries the load.

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 and scope: 'the domains that rank in Google for a set of up to 100 keywords', and enumerates the returned metrics (average/median position, visibility, traffic, keyword count). That is far more than a restated title. It stops short of distinguishing itself from close siblings like competitor_domains or ranked_keywords, which an agent must resolve by name alone.

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?

'Use when you need who owns the search results of a topic' gives a clear selection context for the tool. There are no explicit exclusions or named alternatives, so the agent gets positive guidance but no routing rule against competitor_domains, ranked_keywords or domain_overview.

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