Quattr

ai_page_citations

Read-only

AI answer-engine (ChatGPT/Perplexity/Gemini/AI Mode) citations — NOT Google's on-SERP AI Overviews (use competitive_* for those). Which of your pages get cited in AI answers, and how often? Ranks your cited URLs by AI-answer citation count, each with its citation category (blog / comparison / product / docs) and average citation position. Pass a competitor domain to see THAT domain's cited URLs instead (the domain drawer). Use for "which of our pages do AI answers cite", "cited URL breakdown", "a competitor's cited pages". Per-segment.

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": {
      "segment": "<segment>",
      "date_range": "<date_range>"
    },
    "name": "ai_page_citations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`brand`	No	Branded vs non-branded prompts.
`top_n`	No
`intent`	No	Restrict to one intent (resolve_entity first).
`segment`	Yes	Tracked market-share segment id, OR an AI-visibility tracker id (e.g. "AI Tracker") which is decomposed to its per-engine segments. resolve_entity first if unsure.
`platform`	No	Answer engine to scope to ("chatgpt" / "gemini" / "aimode" / "perplexity"). When `segment` is a tracker, this picks that engine's market-share segment (the engine cut IS the segment, not a column). Omit for all engines.
`competitor`	No	A competitor domain to see ITS cited URLs (the domain drawer) instead of your own pages.
`date_range`	Yes	Explicit date range, e.g. "2026-05-01 to 2026-05-31". Both endpoints are INCLUSIVE — the END day is covered (a 7-day range = 7 days). Quattr weeks run Sunday–Saturday; for "last week" use the most recent complete Sun–Sat span.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes beyond that by disclosing the return contents (citation category, average citation position, ranking by citation count) and the behavioral switch when a competitor domain is passed. It does not address pagination or result-size limits, keeping it from a 5.

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 core purpose and the crucial NOT-Google-AI-Overviews distinction, then layers modes and example phrasings. It is dense but every clause carries signal; the trailing "Per-segment." fragment is slightly abrupt but not wasteful.

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?

With no output schema and 7 params, the description covers purpose, output content, the competitor mode, and engine scoping (platform) well enough to call correctly. Remaining gaps (result limits, pagination, exact output shape) are minor for a read-only ranking tool.

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 high (86%), so the schema already documents most parameters, setting a baseline of 3. The description adds cross-parameter context beyond the schema: that passing a competitor swaps the output to that domain's cited URLs, and "per-segment" framing ties segment/platform together. This is useful semantic lift over the field-level docs.

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 (ranks your cited URLs by AI-answer citation count) and immediately distinguishes itself from Google's on-SERP AI Overviews, naming the sibling (competitive_*) that covers that case. An agent can tell this apart from ai_citation_attribution and ai_visibility_citation_audit without opening any schema.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use phrases ("which of our pages do AI answers cite", "cited URL breakdown", "a competitor's cited pages") and a when-NOT (Google AI Overviews → competitive_*). The competitor-domain alternative mode ("domain drawer") is also spelled out, leaving little to inference.

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

All Quattr 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?