MentionedOn Visibility and Website Fixes

See whether an improvement worked

get_improvement_results

Read-onlyIdempotent

Needs a connected MentionedOn account. Use for 'did my new page work?': returns the question being improved, the page published for it, and before/after evidence: saved assistant answers in equal windows either side of publication (same settings only), any Google AI Overview follow-up, and AI-referred visits to that page. Needs businessId. Read-only; runs no scan. A change after publication does not prove the page caused it.

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": {
      "businessId": "<businessId>"
    },
    "name": "get_improvement_results"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`businessId`	Yes	Business id returned by list_monitored_businesses.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`nextStep`	Yes
`reportUrl`	Yes
`aiVisitors`	Yes
`assistants`	Yes
`businessId`	Yes
`improvement`	Yes
`limitations`	Yes
`googleAiOverview`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world), and the description still adds real value: the auth prerequisite, the 'same settings only' comparison constraint, the equal-window methodology, and the explicit causal caveat that a change after publication does not prove causation. That last point is behavioral context an agent could not infer from structured fields.

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 the prerequisite, then the use case, then the returned evidence, then the caveat – a sensible order. The long colon-and-list sentence is dense but every clause carries information; only slight trimming is possible.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the description usefully frames what evidence types to expect, and it covers prerequisites, constraints, and interpretation limits. Nothing an agent needs to invoke or interpret this tool correctly is missing.

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?

One parameter at 100% schema description coverage, where the schema already explains businessId as coming from list_monitored_businesses. The description only restates 'Needs businessId' without adding format or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 question it answers ('did my new page work?') and enumerates exactly what comes back: the improved question, the published page, before/after saved answers, AI Overview follow-up, and AI-referred visits. That scope is distinct from report-style siblings like get_visibility_report or summarize_scan_evidence.

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?

Gives an explicit trigger phrase and prerequisite ('Needs a connected MentionedOn account', 'Needs businessId'), and rules out the scan path with 'Read-only; runs no scan'. It never names an alternative tool to use when this one does not fit, so it stops short of a 5.

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

All MentionedOn Visibility and Website Fixes 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?