Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SEO Score API

by io.github.SeoScoreAPI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Console Quick Wins

quick_wins
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find the page-2 quick wins in the user's own Google Search Console data: queries ranking 11-20 worth working on first, each with an opportunity score and an estimate of the extra clicks from moving onto page 1. The API does not connect to Search Console: pass the exported rows or the CSV export text. Nothing is stored. The click numbers are estimates. Works on every plan; counts as one audit. Up to 1 MB per request.

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": "quick_wins"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
csvNoThe Performance export as text, with a header row. Use instead of rows.
rowsNoRows like {query, page, clicks, impressions, position}. `page` is optional.
limitNoDefault 25, max 200.
exclude_termsNoWords to leave out, such as the brand name.
min_impressionsNoSkip queries with fewer impressions. Default 50.
target_positionNo1-10, default 5.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quick_winsNoQueries ranking 11-20 with opportunity score and estimated extra clicks.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds real behavior beyond the annotations: no live Search Console connection, nothing stored, estimates are approximations, request size capped at 1 MB, and audit/plan cost implications. The annotations already cover read-only and idempotent behavior, but the description adds the operational constraints an agent needs before calling.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads what the tool finds and its output, then moves through input mode, storage, estimate caveat, plan cost, and size limit. Every sentence carries operational information, and there is no filler.

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?

Given the output schema exists, the description does not need to enumerate return fields. It covers the input prerequisite, data handling, estimate caveat, size limit, and billing context, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke this stateless analysis tool 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 coverage is 100%, so the parameter meanings are already documented. The description clarifies that the tool accepts either exported rows or CSV text but does not add semantics for exclude_terms, min_impressions, limit, or target_position beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate here.

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 and resource: finds page-2 quick wins (queries ranking 11-20) in a user's own Search Console data, with opportunity score and extra-click estimate. The niche scope ('page-2 quick wins') is distinct from any generic audit sibling in the list.

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?

Explains the key prerequisite: the API does not connect to Search Console, so the agent must pass exported rows or CSV text. It also says it works on every plan and counts as one audit, which helps with cost decisions. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool for connected-Search-Console queries, so it stops short of full alternative routing.

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

All SEO Score API toolsInspect
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