index_coverageHas Google seen your pages? Works with zero traffic data, so it is useful from a site's first day. Returns which URLs are indexed, which were crawled but not indexed, which were never discovered, and where Google picked a different canonical than you declared.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | Yes | Search Console property, e.g. sc-domain:example.com | |
| urls | No | Optional. Defaults to URLs found in the site's sitemap. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden. It discloses the tool's input (Search Console property) and output categories (indexed, crawled but not indexed, never discovered, canonical mismatch). However, it does not mention potential limitations like API rate limits, data freshness, or permission requirements.
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 two sentences, front-loading the key question and then listing outputs. It is concise without redundancy, though the first sentence could be more direct.
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 tool has only two parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what the tool does and its outputs. However, it lacks details on return format, pagination if any, or error handling, which might be needed for a complete understanding.
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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add new information about the parameters beyond what the schema provides (site as SC property, urls defaulting to sitemap). It does explain the tool's functionality but not parameter details.
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 tool's purpose: checking which URLs Google has indexed, crawled, or discovered, and canonical mismatches. It distinguishes from sibling tools like serp_position or keyword_volume by focusing on index coverage.
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 explicitly mentions it works with zero traffic data, making it useful from day one, implying a usage context when other tools (like page_yield) may not be applicable. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.
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).