Webanto

List keyword actions

webanto_list_keyword_actions

Read-onlyIdempotent

List proposals built only from this organization's imported Search Console data, topic groups and rank checks. Each item names a page or query and the measured evidence. Discovery impressions are Search Console demand, not market search volume. Competitor order is the multi-engine result pool, not a Google-only rank. Reads do not accept, dismiss, publish, or spend inference credits. Accept and dismiss happen on the dashboard and do not push a change to a store. Follow actions.page.next_cursor while retaining the same status.

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_list_keyword_actions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`cursor`	No	next_cursor from the previous page, retaining the same status. Omit for the first page.
`status`	No	proposed is waiting for a person. accepted and dismissed stay as decided. expired dropped off the latest refresh.	proposed
`page_size`	No	Actions returned per page, newest update first.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: no inference credits are spent, accept/dismiss occur on the dashboard, and no change is pushed to a store. It also pre-empts misinterpretation of the data (discovery impressions are not market volume; competitor order is a multi-engine pool, not a Google-only rank).

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 then layers caveats in short, declarative sentences. It is somewhat dense with disclaimers, but each sentence carries distinct information (data scope, evidence meaning, side-effect boundaries, pagination), so little is wasted.

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 an output schema present, the description need not explain return values, and it correctly focuses on scope, data interpretation, side effects and pagination. An agent has enough to call it correctly; only an explicit pointer to a sibling tool for the accept/dismiss workflow is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by tying the cursor to 'actions.page.next_cursor' and stressing that the same status must be retained across pages, which is a real usage constraint not spelled out in the schema. The status enum semantics are already fully documented in the schema, so no further credit is warranted there.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('List proposals') and immediately scopes the data source to this organization's imported Search Console data, topic groups and rank checks. It also clarifies what each item contains (a page or query plus measured evidence), which distinguishes it from generic keyword listing siblings, though it never names an alternative tool explicitly.

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 clearly states what this tool does not do ('Reads do not accept, dismiss, publish, or spend inference credits') and where those actions live ('Accept and dismiss happen on the dashboard'), which is strong when-not guidance. It also gives pagination guidance ('Follow actions.page.next_cursor while retaining the same status'), but stops short of naming a sibling tool to use instead for other needs.

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?