Webanto

Audit saved published content SEO

webanto_get_seo_audit

Read-onlyIdempotent

Run the existing deterministic SEO checks on at most 200 most recently updated saved published content entries in this organization. Reports representative findings, full analyzed type counts, sample coverage and omissions. Score is null when no entries were analyzed. This is not a live crawl or source-template/Open Graph, performance or ranking analysis. No generation, fixes, provider calls or credits.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "webanto_get_seo_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, and the description adds real behavioral context beyond them: the 200-entry cap, deterministic (not live) checks, that the score is null when nothing was analyzed, and that no credits or provider calls are consumed. That is exactly the extra context an agent needs before invoking.

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-loaded with the core action and scope, then the exclusions. It is dense and slightly list-like in the final sentence, but every clause carries information and nothing is redundant.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, yet the description still clarifies the null-score edge case and that findings are representative with coverage and omissions. For a zero-parameter, read-only audit tool this is complete.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter meaning to add. The description correctly implies no inputs are required by describing organization-scoped, fixed-scope behavior.

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 and resource ('Run the existing deterministic SEO checks on ... saved published content entries') and bounds the scope ('at most 200 most recently updated', 'in this organization'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from a live crawl, so an agent can separate it from crawl-style or report-style siblings.

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 clear when-to-use context via exclusions: not a live crawl, not source-template/Open Graph, performance or ranking analysis, and no generation/fixes/provider calls. It does not name a specific sibling alternative to use instead, which keeps it 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 Webanto 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?