Website, local SEO, performance and conversion audits with human-confirmed checkout.
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool targets a distinct step in the audit sales flow: listing offers, preparing checkout, and checking order status. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, even though the status tool also returns audit results—this is clearly scoped to the order lifecycle.
All tool names follow a clear verb_noun pattern with the shared 'website_audit' prefix: get_website_audit_offers, get_website_audit_order_status, prepare_website_audit_checkout. The consistent prefix and action verbs make the set predictable and easy to navigate.
Three tools is well-scoped for the narrow purpose of a website audit sales workflow. Each tool fills a necessary role without redundancy or bloat, fitting comfortably within the ideal range.
The set covers the essential customer journey: browse offers, initiate payment, verify payment and retrieve results. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to explicitly trigger or request an audit beyond the quick win tier, but the automatic generation described in the status tool mitigates this.
Free, read-only format check only. Does NOT crawl the website, resolve DNS, verify egress safety, collect money, or create a checkout.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | Yes |
List current website audit tiers and pricing. Read-only and creates no charge.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, lowering the burden on the description. The description adds value by stating 'creates no charge,' which is a billing-relevant behavior not conveyed by 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two short sentences with no wasted words. The main action and scope are front-loaded, and the behavioral clarification is a single efficient addition.
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?
For a zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description plus annotations fully cover what an agent needs to invoke it correctly. The sibling tool name clarifies the alternative path.
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?
With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the schema carries no parameter documentation burden. The description correctly implies the tool requires no input by simply stating it lists offers.
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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a concrete resource ('current website audit tiers and pricing'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling prepare_website_audit_checkout. The title reinforces the same scope, so an agent can immediately understand what the tool does.
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 clearly frames this as an informational read-only listing, which by contrast implies the sibling checkout tool is for purchasing. It does not explicitly name when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous for a zero-parameter listing tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Use the Stripe Checkout Session ID returned by the paid flow to independently verify payment. For the $49 Quick Win Audit, this also returns the automatically generated bounded audit result when available.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| session_id | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the bar for additional disclosure is lowered. The description adds context that it independently verifies payment and returns a bounded audit result conditionally, which is useful behavioral information beyond 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.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose and the parameter origin, with no redundant wording. Every word adds value, making it highly efficient.
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?
For a simple one-parameter read-only tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It explains the trigger (session ID) and the expected outcome (audit result when available), though it could specify error behavior for invalid sessions, but this is a minor gap given the tool's simplicity.
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?
The schema coverage is 0%, but the description fully explains the single parameter (session_id) as the Stripe Checkout Session ID from the paid flow. This completely compensates for the missing schema descriptions and gives the agent precise meaning for the parameter.
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 states a specific verb (verify) and resource (payment/audit result), and it clearly differentiates from siblings by describing the post-payment status check. It mentions the Stripe Checkout Session ID and the conditional audit result, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's role.
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?
It explicitly says to use the Stripe Checkout Session ID from the paid flow, establishing the clear prerequisite and context for invocation. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives, but the sibling names and the described flow make the usage context sufficiently clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
After explicit human agreement to pay, prepare checkout for an eligible public HTTPS website. Use the free read-only domain check first. It checks only URL format, NOT DNS/network reachability or ultimate delivery. A checkout session is not payment proof.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tier | Yes | ||
| domain | Yes | ||
| referral_code | No | ||
| user_confirmed_payment | Yes |
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
check_website_audit_domain_formatget_website_audit_order_statusprepare_website_audit_checkout1 field changedInput schema / properties / tier / enumPrevious value: -[
- "complete",
- "patch"
-]New value: +[
+ "quick",
+ "complete",
+ "patch"
+]get_website_audit_offersprepare_website_audit_checkoutSEO & UX audits for your websites: findings, Search Console data, growth plan and site scans.
AI website growth audits: SEO, performance, AI readiness (GEO), conversion, a11y, security.
SEO audits and AI crawler checks. Honest findings only; no invented scores.
SEO, AEO and GEO audits, rank tracking, AI-citation scans and WordPress editing for any site.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
