Skip to main content
Glama

GetCited

by dev.getcited
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

GEO visibility summary

geo_summary
Read-onlyIdempotent

Returns how often the site appears in AI answers: one row per tracked prompt, and within it one entry per engine with runs, citedRuns, mentionedRuns, citedRate and mentionedRate, plus the competitor domains cited instead, over the last days. Read-only. Frequency over the window is the metric: there is never a per-run rank, and engines are never blended. An empty array means no prompts (add_geo_prompts); runs of 0 mean nothing measured in the window yet (check_geo). Fewer than three runs on an engine is too few to call a gap. Pass view: "full" for the competitor URLs and the fan-out queries the engine issued behind each prompt; that payload is per prompt per engine and grows past what fits in a context window, which is why it is not the default.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoWindow in days, counted back from now, 1-365; default 30, e.g. 90 for a quarter
viewNobrief (the default) is the rates and the top competitor domains. full adds the competitor URLs and fan-out queries per engine, which is far larger.
projectIdYesProject id (a UUID) from add_project or list_projects, e.g. "0190f7a2-8c1e-7d3a-9b4f-2e6c1a5d8f30"

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / view
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "brief (the default) is the rates and the top competitor domains. full adds the competitor URLs and fan-out queries per engine, which is far larger.",
+  "enum": [
+    "brief",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / days / description
      Added value: +"Window in days, counted back from now, 1-365; default 30, e.g. 90 for a quarter"
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project id (a UUID) from list_projects or add_project"New value: +"Project id (a UUID) from add_project or list_projects, e.g. \"0190f7a2-8c1e-7d3a-9b4f-2e6c1a5d8f30\""
  3. Added

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive already covered by annotations, the description adds real behavioral context: frequency-over-window is the metric, there is never a per-run rank, engines are never blended, fewer than three runs is too few to call a gap, and view:"full" can exceed a context window. These are non-obvious constraints an agent cannot infer from annotations.

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 purpose and return shape before dipping into edge-case semantics. It is dense and mostly earns its length, though it restates the view:"full" payload tradeoff that the schema already carries, making it slightly longer than strictly necessary.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the full burden of explaining the return payload, and it does so field-by-field (runs, citedRuns, mentionedRuns, citedRate, mentionedRate, competitor domains). Combined with interpretation rules for empty and zero-run results, an agent has everything needed to call and read it correctly.

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 days, view, and projectId are already fully documented with ranges, enum values, and defaults. The description reinforces view semantics (why full is not default) but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (returns GEO visibility in AI answers) and precisely describes the return shape: one row per tracked prompt, one entry per engine with runs/citedRuns/mentionedRuns/citedRate/mentionedRate plus competitor domains. It explicitly differentiates itself from siblings by referencing add_geo_prompts and check_geo for the empty/zero cases.

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?

Routing guidance is present for the common edge cases: an empty array routes to add_geo_prompts, zero runs routes to check_geo. It also tells the agent when to pass view:"full" (competitor URLs and fan-out queries) versus the default. It lacks an explicit statement of the primary 'use this when you want X' trigger, but the conditionality it does provide is concrete.

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

All GetCited toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Give agents eyes on the webHosted screenshot MCP. Send a URL, get a pixel-perfect image. $0.002 per grab. Works with Claude, Cursor, and Codex.grabbit.liveAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources