search_catalog
Search the Grounded AEO catalog by company name or domain. Returns up to 10 matches with tier and verification state.
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Name or domain fragment |
grounded-aeo
TDQS
A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, but the description discloses the return limit (10 matches) and fields (tier, verification state). Lacks details on authorization or rate limits.
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?
Single efficient sentence front-loads purpose and result, with no wasted words.
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?
Complete for a simple search tool with one param: covers purpose, method, and return value details (limit, fields) despite 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 already describes the query parameter ('Name or domain fragment'). Description reinforces this but adds minimal new meaning.
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 clearly states the tool searches the Grounded AEO catalog by company name or domain, and distinguishes from siblings like check_aeo_record which likely checks a specific record.
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 specifies when to use (to search by name/domain) and implies context via siblings, but does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives.
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.
TDQS
A4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: checking AEO records, reading SERP data, generating records, retrieving facts, citations, competitor snapshots, engine visibility, keyword gaps, etc. Even similar-sounding tools like get_citations and get_cited_domains are clearly delineated by their descriptions. No two tools appear to overlap in purpose.
Naming Consistency5/5
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun convention using snake_case: check_*, get_*, generate_*, propose_*, run_*, search_*. There is no mixing of casing or verb styles, and each name instantly communicates the action and subject.
Tool Count5/5
With 14 tools, the server is well-scoped for the domain of AI citation optimization. Each tool contributes a unique capability, and the count is neither sparse nor bloated. The number fits comfortably within the ideal 3-15 range for a focused server.
Completeness4/5
The tool surface covers the core lifecycle: checking existing records, generating new records, auditing and fixing sites, retrieving data, analyzing gaps, and proposing briefs. Minor gaps exist such as no direct tool for claiming a domain or managing tracked keywords/competitors, but those may be external to the MCP server. Overall, the set supports the intended workflows well.