SEO GSC Wizard MCP

Submit URLs to IndexNow

submit_indexnow_urls

Pings IndexNow for the given URLs, telling participating search engines (Bing, Yandex, Seznam) that the pages have changed. The property needs an IndexNow API key and a published key file: check get_indexnow_settings first. If no key is set: 1) call update_indexnow_settings with generateKey: true; 2) publish the returned keyFileContent as a plain-text file at the returned keyFileUrl (the root of every host you submit URLs for); 3) call submit_indexnow_urls again. URLs are grouped by host before submission. Up to 100 URLs per call. Note that the usual 202 response means "accepted, key validation pending", not delivered: engines fetch the site key file afterwards and silently discard the batch if it is not reachable, so do not report a 202 as confirmed indexing.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`urls`	Yes
`siteUrl`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`failed`	No
`actions`	No
`batchId`	No
`keyFile`	No
`message`	No
`outcome`	No
`siteUrl`	No
`attempted`	No
`submitted`	No
`keySiteUrl`	No
`submissions`	No
`historyLogged`	No
`skippedOffProperty`	No
`pendingKeyValidation`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 18, 2026
- changedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / keyFile / items / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```
- changedOutput schema / properties / submissions / items / additionalProperties
```
Previous value: -falseNew value: +true
```
Changed2 schema fields changedOct 10, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / historyLogged
```
Added value: +{
+  "$ref": "#/properties/pendingKeyValidation"
+}
```
- addedOutput schema / properties / keySiteUrl
```
Added value: +{
+  "$ref": "#/properties/siteUrl"
+}
```
First observedOct 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds far more: a 100-URL cap, host-based grouping, and the crucial warning that a 202 means 'key validation pending', not delivered, with silent discards if the key file is unreachable.

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?

Front-loads what the tool does and the prerequisite, then the remediation steps and the 202 caveat. Dense and mostly waste-free, though the numbered recovery workflow makes it longer than a typical one-liner.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. Combined with prerequisites, batching limits and response-semantics caveats, an agent has everything needed to call and interpret this correctly.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies the URLs array limit (100) and host grouping, but leaves siteUrl's exact semantics ambiguous — it is only implied via the keyFileUrl host discussion rather than defined.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (pings IndexNow with given URLs) and names the effect and recipients (Bing, Yandex, Seznam). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like update_indexnow_settings, get_indexnow_settings and submit_sitemap.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly routes the agent: check get_indexnow_settings first, and if no key exists, follow a numbered three-step remediation (generateKey, publish keyFileContent, resubmit). Names both sibling tools and the exact conditions that select them.

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

All SEO GSC Wizard MCP 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?