best-keyword-research-api
Server Details
Best Keyword Research API: This Keyword Tool API Find millions of keyword suggestions for your SEO..
- Status
- Healthy
- Uptime
- 100.0% over 47 days
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-06-18
- URL
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
With only one tool, there is no possibility of confusion between tools. Every (and the only) tool has a clearly distinct purpose by virtue of being unique.
The single tool name 'get_keyword_research' follows a consistent verb_noun pattern. Since there is only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained.
The server has only one tool, which feels thin for a general-purpose API. While it is not trivial, the scope is minimal and agents may need more operations to fully utilize the domain.
The server only offers a single 'get' operation, covering the core querying functionality but lacking any supporting operations like pagination, source selection, or result filtering. This makes the surface notably incomplete for a comprehensive keyword research workflow.
Available Tools
1 toolget_keyword_researchKeyword ResearchCInspect
Find millions of keyword suggestions for your SEO. Enter a topic and get your list of best keywords for you Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| country | No | ||
| keyword | No | ||
| languagecode | No |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions billing ('Billing per call: 1 Credits') and implies a list output, but it does not clarify response structure, rate limits, authentication needs, data source, or limitations. This is insufficient disclosure for a tool with zero annotation support.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the sentence 'list of best keywords for you Billing per call: 1 Credits' has a grammar/punctuation flaw and awkwardly merges billing into the main sentence, reducing structural polish.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, no annotations, and no coverage for three parameters. The description explains the general use case and one input concept, but it omits critical details about country/language behavior, return format, and edge cases, making it incomplete for effective tool invocation.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It loosely equates the 'keyword' parameter with a 'topic,' but it does not explain the 'country' or 'languagecode' parameters at all. Only partial meaning is added beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool's function with 'Find millions of keyword suggestions for your SEO' and 'get your list of best keywords.' This is a specific verb+resource pairing, though the grammar is awkward and it does not distinguish from sibling tools (none provided).
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description gives implied usage context ('for your SEO' and 'Enter a topic'), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions or prerequisites. This is usable but not strongly instructive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
- First observed
get_keyword_research
Related MCP Connectors
Ahrefs: Ahrefs API: SEO powerhouse featuring keyword research, backlink analysis, and SERP tracking.
Ubersuggest SEO tools: keyword research, competitor analysis, backlinks, site audits and more.
Google Image Search: Fast and Simple Google Images Search API. You can get 100+ search results in.
Image Search: Fast and Simple Image Search API. You can get 100+ search results in one query!.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceFree keyword research with live search volume, CPC, competition and 12-month trends.1116 npmMIT

keyword-researchofficial
FlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables keyword idea and question discovery for any seed term, with search volume, difficulty, and SERP intent data.-- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables professional SEO/SEM research with geolocalized keyword discovery, competitor analysis, and SERP ranking insights using DataForSEO API.-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceEnables keyword research across 70 languages without API keys, providing Google Suggest autocomplete, People Also Ask, related searches, Jaccard clustering, and language-specific intent tags via MCP tools.MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.