Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

SEO Score API

by io.github.SeoScoreAPI
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Tracker & Pixel Inventory

trackers
Read-onlyIdempotent

List the third-party trackers and pixels a page loads (analytics, advertising, session replay, chat, marketing automation, A/B testing, monitoring), including pixels a tag manager injects. Loads the page in a real browser with no interaction; it does not determine whether a tracker waited for consent, and it is not legal advice. Counts as one audit; a page that can't be loaded is not counted.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "trackers"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull page URL including the protocol, e.g. https://example.com/pricing.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
summaryNoCounts and the consent manager, if any.
trackersNoDetected vendors with category and whether a tag manager injected them.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, open-world, idempotent and non-destructive, and the description adds materially more: tag-manager-injected pixels are captured, consent timing is NOT determined, output is not legal advice, and the call consumes one audit credit with failed loads not counted. The credit/billing behavior in particular is context an agent cannot get from the 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?

Purpose and scope are front-loaded in the first clause, followed by capability expansion and then essential caveats. The sentences are dense but each carries real content; minor density is the only cost.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-shape detail is unnecessary in the description. What remains — method (real browser, no interaction), scope limits (consent not evaluated, not legal advice), and cost accounting — covers everything an agent needs to decide and invoke 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?

There is one required 'url' parameter and schema coverage is 100%, with the schema itself explaining protocol inclusion and giving an example. The description adds no further meaning about the URL (e.g., handling of redirects or non-HTML URLs), so the baseline 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 and resource ('List the third-party trackers and pixels a page loads') and enumerates the categories covered (analytics, advertising, session replay, chat, etc.), so an agent can distinguish it from audits like accessibility_audit or ai_readability without opening a schema.

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?

Implies usage clearly by framing the tool as an inventory of what a page loads and noting it uses a real browser with no interaction, which tells the agent this is passive observation rather than an active crawl or test. It does not explicitly name a sibling alternative or an exclusion case, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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