Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Quattr

by com.quattr.mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

paid_organic_performance_comparison

Read-only

Compare my paid performance with organic using Quattr. Returns a complete side-by-side WHOLE-DOMAIN comparison for Google Ads versus Google organic: clicks, impressions, CTR, and conversions for BOTH channels; paid also includes cost, CPC, and cost per conversion. This is the governed route for "compare paid with organic", "paid vs organic performance", and "how does PPC compare with SEO". It mirrors the two QWA Growth Trends channel queries and never derives conversion rate or silently leaves organic conversions blank. Organic cost/CPC/cost-per-conversion are not applicable and are returned as null with an explicit availability label. For paid/organic KEYWORD OVERLAP use paid_organic_overlap instead.

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": "paid_organic_performance_comparison"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
segmentNoWhole-domain only. Omit or pass "default". A non-default segment is ignored with an explicit note because these QWA channel summaries are not segment-scoped.
date_rangeYesExplicit 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.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish a safe read-only, closed-world profile, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: it mirrors two QWA Growth Trends channel queries, explicitly does not derive conversion rate or silently blank organic conversions, and returns organic cost/CPC/CPA as null with an availability label. This tells the agent how to interpret the output, not just what it is.

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 metric scope before routing details, and every sentence is relevant. However, the null-handling and no-silent-blank behavior is stated twice with overlap, which slightly dilutes efficiency for a two-parameter tool.

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?

For a read-only two-parameter comparison tool with no output schema, the description fully covers returned metrics, null semantics for non-applicable organic fields, scope constraints, and sibling routing. Nothing an agent needs to call it 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters (segment, date_range) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's "WHOLE-DOMAIN" wording reinforces the segment constraint but largely repeats what the schema already states, so no meaningful value is added beyond the baseline.

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 (compare paid vs organic performance) and enumerates the exact metrics returned per channel (clicks, impressions, CTR, conversions; paid adds cost, CPC, cost per conversion). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling paid_organic_overlap, so an agent can route without opening either 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?

Gives explicit routing triggers ("compare paid with organic", "paid vs organic performance", "how does PPC compare with SEO") and an explicit exclusion with a named alternative: "For paid/organic KEYWORD OVERLAP use paid_organic_overlap instead." When-to-use and when-not-to-use are both covered.

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

All Quattr toolsInspect
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