agentseo_domain_traffic_estimateCompare estimated search traffic across multiple domains, subdomains, or URLs before spending deeper analysis credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sync | No | ||
| sort_by | No | organic_traffic | |
| targets | Yes | ||
| language | No | en | |
| location | No | United States | |
| include_paid | No | ||
| location_code | No | ||
| include_local_pack | No | ||
| include_featured_snippet | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description only states 'compare estimated search traffic,' implying a read operation. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, or whether the operation is destructive. More context is needed.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word contributes, and there is no wasted text.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of output schema, numerous parameters, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the response format or how parameters like sync, sort_by, location, etc. affect results, leaving the tool incomplete for effective use.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The description provides no explanation of any of the 9 parameters (schema coverage 0%). Given the high parameter count and no documentation of param semantics, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent unclear about how to configure the request.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'compare', the resource 'estimated search traffic', and the scope 'multiple domains, subdomains, or URLs'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like agentseo_domain_competitors by focusing on traffic estimates rather than competitors or intersections.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description mentions using the tool 'before spending deeper analysis credits,' implying it's for initial screening. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives for deeper analysis.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose due to specific naming (e.g., backlinks_anchors vs backlinks_list) and grouped prefixes. Overlaps are minimal and clarified by descriptions.
All tools follow a consistent snake_case pattern with the 'agentseo_' prefix and domain-specific nouns/verbs (e.g., agentseo_backlinks_anchors, agentseo_content_brief). No mixed conventions.
With 45 tools, the server is on the heavy side for an agent to navigate, though the tools are logically grouped into subdomains (backlinks, content, etc.), justifying the count.
The toolset covers a wide range of SEO tasks including backlinks, content, keywords, SERP analysis, and local SEO. Minor gaps exist (e.g., advanced automation), but core workflows are well-represented.