backlink_profileReferring domains, link count, domain rank and a reading of what they mean. Deliberately does not return the raw link list: a thousand rows of links fills an agent's context without producing a decision.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | Yes | Search Console property |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses key behavioral traits: returns summary metrics only, no raw link list, and provides a reading of metrics. No annotations exist, so description carries full burden.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with key information, no fluff.
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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, description fully explains purpose and scope.
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?
Schema coverage is 100% but description adds no additional meaning for the single parameter 'site' beyond 'Search Console property'.
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?
Clearly states what the tool returns (referring domains, link count, domain rank, a reading) and distinguishes from returning raw link lists, which are not included.
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?
Explicitly says it deliberately does not return raw link list to avoid filling context, implying when to use this tool (for summary) vs. alternatives (for raw links).
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 targets a distinct aspect of SEO analysis: budget, backlinks, competitor gaps, indexing, keyword data, page performance, query insights, and SERP positions. No two tools overlap in purpose.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case noun_noun pattern (e.g., account_status, backlink_profile), making them predictable and easy to interpret.
With 8 tools, the server is well-scoped for SEO analysis, covering key areas without being overwhelming or too sparse.
The tool set covers major SEO analysis domains (indexing, keywords, backlinks, competitors, on-page performance), but lacks a tool for tracking changes over time or providing actionable recommendations (e.g., fix suggestions).