Quattr

internal_link_flow

Read-only

How are internal links distributed across crawled pages? Returns incoming/outgoing internal-link counts per URL from the crawl graph, so you can spot under-linked important pages. Use for "internal link distribution", "which pages get the most internal links". Requires the site crawl feed.

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": {
      "date_range": "<date_range>"
    },
    "name": "internal_link_flow"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`sort`	No	Sort by incoming links — least (under-linked) first by default.	least
`top_n`	No
`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

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, non-destructive, and non-open-world behavior, so the description only needs to add context. It does so by stating the return format (incoming/outgoing counts per URL) and the crawl-feed dependency, though it omits rate limits or pagination details.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and output, and every sentence carries relevant information. There is minor redundancy in the opening question and repeated 'internal link' phrasing, but overall it is efficient.

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, the description adequately explains return values and adds the required crawl-feed prerequisite. It leaves top_n undocumented in both schema and description, but for a three-parameter read-only tool the description is otherwise complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds no parameter-level meaning: date_range, sort, and top_n are never mentioned. The schema itself documents date_range and sort well, but top_n has no description and the 67% schema coverage falls into the gap where the description should compensate — it does not.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific operation — returning incoming/outgoing internal-link counts per URL from the crawl graph — and explains the analytical use case. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the related sibling orphan_pages, which would require naming the alternative.

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 gives clear intended usage with quoted phrases ('internal link distribution', 'which pages get the most internal links') and a prerequisite ('Requires the site crawl feed'). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance or a named alternative sibling, but the context is clear.

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?