Skip to main content
Glama

GoAI Moat AI Visibility Audit

by com.goaimoat
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Audit Ai Visibility

audit_ai_visibility

Deep-audit a brand's visibility in AI answers (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews).

FREE TIER: 1 full deep audit per email — pass your email to unlock it. DEVELOPER/UNLIMITED: pass an api_key (or license_key) from a developer subscription at https://niebingyu.gumroad.com/l/njpksu to run audits programmatically with no email. Without email/api_key you get the audit framework and tier mapping only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
emailNoYour email — unlocks 1 free full audit.
scoreNoOptional known 0-30 checklist score. If provided, a tier + fix plan is included for free.
api_keyNoDeveloper API key — equivalent to license_key, for agent/API callers.
categoryNoProduct/service category (e.g. "phone case", "DTC fashion").
brand_nameYesThe brand/company to audit.
license_keyNoGumroad license key — unlocks unlimited full audits.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / api_key
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "",
+  "description": "Developer API key — equivalent to license_key, for agent/API callers.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the free-tier cap, the developer/unlimited path, and the degraded output when no credentials are supplied. It stops short of mentioning side effects or external calls, but there is no contradiction with the schema.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses compact, scannable tier headings. Every sentence adds actionable information—no filler or repetition. The credential source URL is included exactly where it is needed.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value details do not need to be in the description. The description sufficiently covers the required brand_name, optional auth paths, and the outcome when credentials are missing. It does not address error handling or invalid-key behavior, but the sibling check_license tool and output schema reduce that gap.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, providing the baseline of 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by mapping email, api_key, and license_key to their tier consequences and noting that score unlocks a free tier plus fix plan. This helps an agent choose the right parameter combination.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Deep-audit a brand's visibility in AI answers' with concrete examples (ChatGPT, Perplexity, AI Overviews). It is clearly distinct from the sibling helper tools like get_checklist or get_usage because it names the primary audit action rather than a supporting utility.

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 explicit, decision-relevant usage guidance: email unlocks one free audit, api_key/license_key enables programmatic use, and absence of both returns only the framework/tier mapping. It does not explicitly compare against sibling tools, but the authentication-dependent instructions are clear and practical.

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

All GoAI Moat AI Visibility Audit 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