Fetch a page and audit core on-page SEO signals: title/meta description length, canonical tag, heading structure, image alt text coverage, viewport tag, robots meta, word count. Returns a list of concrete issues found. Single page only — not a site crawl.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Full page URL, e.g. https://example.com/page |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the tool fetches a page, audits a defined list of on-page elements, and returns a list of concrete issues. It does not mention potential fetch failures or rate limits, but for a read-only audit tool the key behavior is well covered.
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 deliver the purpose, scope, output type, and an explicit exclusion. The most important distinguishing constraint ('Single page only') is front-loaded near the end but clearly stated, and no words are wasted.
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 single-parameter audit tool with no output schema, the description is remarkably complete: it lists what is audited, what is returned, and what the tool does not do. An agent has enough information to decide whether to call it and to know what it will receive.
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?
There is only one parameter, url, and the schema already describes it as a 'Full page URL' with an example. The description reinforces that this is a single-page tool but adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 names a specific verb ('Fetch a page and audit'), a specific resource ('page'), and enumerates the exact on-page signals covered. It also explicitly contrasts itself with site-wide crawls ('Single page only — not a site crawl'), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like ai_crawler_audit.
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 indicates this tool is for single-page SEO audits rather than site-wide crawls, which gives the agent a clear condition for when to use it. It does not name sibling alternatives explicitly, but the exclusion is specific enough to route the agent away from crawl-oriented tools.
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.
Most tools target distinct actions, but backlinks_for_domain and top_linkers_for_domain overlap significantly since both return ranked linking domains with authority and link counts, differing mainly in scope. The descriptions do clarify one is a full payload and the other a quick skim, so an agent can usually choose correctly.
All names are lowercase snake_case and readable, but conventions are mixed: several are noun phrases like site_audit and domain_authority_score, some are verb-first like find_link_prospects, and a couple are object-verb like schema_validate and indexnow_submit. The set is understandable but lacks a single consistent naming pattern.
13 tools is appropriate for a backlink and SEO-focused server, fitting comfortably in the well-scoped range. Each area—backlink analysis, AI visibility, site auditing, and indexing—has dedicated tools without the set feeling bloated.
The backlink workflow is well covered: scoring, listing, overlapping linkers, prospect discovery, toxic-link flags, and live verification all exist. Minor gaps remain, such as no per-URL or anchor-level backlink data and no rank-tracking or keyword research, but the core stated purpose is served without major dead ends.