Seerxo
Server Details
Generate SEO-optimized Etsy listings — title, description, and 13 tags — from your AI assistant.
- Status
- Healthy
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP
- URL
- Repository
- semihbugrasezer/seerxo
- GitHub Stars
- 25
- Server Listing
- Etsy SEO Generator
Glama MCP Gateway
Connect through Glama MCP Gateway for full control over tool access and complete visibility into every call.
Full call logging
Every tool call is logged with complete inputs and outputs, so you can debug issues and audit what your agents are doing.
Tool access control
Enable or disable individual tools per connector, so you decide what your agents can and cannot do.
Managed credentials
Glama handles OAuth flows, token storage, and automatic rotation, so credentials never expire on your clients.
Usage analytics
See which tools your agents call, how often, and when, so you can understand usage patterns and catch anomalies.
Tool Definition Quality
Average 4.3/5 across 4 of 5 tools scored.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: generating listings, analyzing, optimizing, checking quota, and suggesting keywords. No overlap or ambiguity.
Most tools follow the 'seerxo_' prefix pattern, but 'generate_etsy_seo' lacks this prefix, creating a minor inconsistency.
Five tools is well-scoped for an Etsy SEO assistant, covering core operations without unnecessary bloat.
The tool set covers the full SEO workflow: generate, analyze, optimize, keyword suggestions, and quota management. No obvious gaps for its domain.
Available Tools
5 toolsgenerate_etsy_seoGenerate Etsy listingInspect
Use this when the user wants a complete SEO-optimized Etsy listing from a product idea. Returns a title, A/B title variants, description, exactly 13 tags, and attributes. Uses one generation from the monthly quota.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| category | No | Etsy category, e.g. "Home & Living" | |
| product_name | Yes | Product description, e.g. "handmade ceramic coffee mug, speckled glaze, 12oz" |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| tags | Yes | All 13 Etsy tags. |
| title | Yes | Primary SEO title. |
| usage | Yes | |
| features | Yes | Product feature highlights. |
| cross_sell | Yes | Suggested complementary product. |
| description | Yes | SEO-optimized product description. |
| shipping_tip | Yes | Shipping pricing guidance. |
| target_keywords | Yes | Primary keyword phrases targeted by the listing. |
| title_alternatives | Yes | Alternative titles for A/B testing. |
| suggested_attributes | Yes | Suggested Etsy attribute values. |
seerxo_analyze_listingAudit Etsy listingARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Use this when the user wants to score or diagnose an existing Etsy listing. Returns an explainable SEO score, sub-scores, weak points, missing keywords, and tag utilization. Free — does not use quota.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tags | No | Current Etsy tags | |
| title | No | Current Etsy listing title | |
| description | No | Current Etsy listing description | |
| product_name | No | Short product description, e.g. "handmade ceramic coffee mug, speckled glaze, 12oz" |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| fixes | Yes | Legacy actionable fix list. |
| grade | Yes | Letter grade derived from the SEO score. |
| total | Yes | Total number of SEO checks. |
| checks | Yes | All evaluated SEO checks. |
| passed | Yes | Number of SEO checks that passed. |
| percent | Yes | Legacy alias for the overall SEO score. |
| coverage | Yes | Percentage of product keywords covered by the listing. |
| seoScore | Yes | Overall Etsy SEO score from 0 to 100. |
| subScores | Yes | |
| weakPoints | Yes | Ranked SEO findings and fixes. |
| tagUtilization | Yes | |
| missingKeywords | Yes | Product keywords missing from the listing. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by specifying the output (explainable SEO score, sub-scores, etc.) and cost (free, no quota). No contradictions found.
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?
Three concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose and key outputs. No unnecessary words. Efficient and well-structured.
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?
With output schema present, the description adequately covers what the tool does. It lists return values and cost. Could mention that listing must exist on Etsy, but the parameters imply that. Overall complete for a diagnostic tool.
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% with each parameter described adequately. The tool description does not add additional parameter explanations beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'score or diagnose an existing Etsy listing'. It specifies the return value (SEO score, sub-scores, weak points, missing keywords, tag utilization), distinguishing it from sibling tools like generate_etsy_seo or seerxo_optimize_listing.
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 says 'Use this when...' providing clear context. It mentions the tool is free and does not use quota, aiding decision-making. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
seerxo_optimize_listingOptimize Etsy listingAInspect
Use this when the user wants to rewrite an existing Etsy title, description, or tags based on audit findings. A re-audit gate prevents score regression. Uses one generation from the monthly quota.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| mode | No | Which fields to rewrite (default: full) | |
| tags | No | Current Etsy tags | |
| title | No | Current Etsy listing title | |
| description | No | Current Etsy listing description | |
| product_name | No | Short product description, e.g. "handmade ceramic coffee mug, speckled glaze, 12oz" |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| diff | Yes | Before and after values for each listing field. |
| mode | Yes | Optimization mode that was applied. |
| after | Yes | Audit summary after optimization. |
| usage | Yes | |
| before | Yes | Audit summary before optimization. |
| fallback | Yes | Whether the original listing was kept to prevent a score regression. |
| resolved | Yes | Finding IDs resolved by the rewrite. |
| optimized | Yes | |
| unresolved | Yes | Finding IDs still present after the rewrite. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds two key behaviors: a 're-audit gate prevents score regression' and 'Uses one generation from the monthly quota.' These go beyond annotation hints and inform the agent of important constraints.
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, no filler. Information is front-loaded: use case, re-audit gate, quota. Every sentence adds value. Highly concise.
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 existence of an output schema (not shown but confirmed) and 100% parameter coverage, the description covers the main use case, re-audit logic, quota impact, and mode selection. It could mention that results are AI-generated, but overall complete for a rewrite tool.
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 the schema already describes all parameters adequately. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; e.g., it mentions rewriting fields but doesn't elaborate on parameter details or constraints. 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 clearly states it rewrites existing Etsy listing fields based on audit findings, with a specific verb ('rewrite') and resource ('title, description, or tags'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'generate_etsy_seo' (new content) and 'seerxo_analyze_listing' (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?
Explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants to rewrite... based on audit findings' and mentions a 're-audit gate' for quality. While it doesn't specify when not to use, the context and sibling tools imply alternatives. Clear usage context is provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
seerxo_quotaCheck quotaARead-onlyIdempotentInspect
Use this when the user asks about Seerxo credits or usage. Shows the authenticated account's remaining monthly generation quota. Free.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No parameters | |||
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| tier | Yes | Seerxo account tier. |
| limit | Yes | Monthly generation limit. |
| current | Yes | Generations used this month. |
| remaining | Yes | Generations remaining this month. |
| usageByChannel | Yes |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses that the tool shows remaining monthly generation quota and is free. Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so description adds useful behavioral context beyond the structured fields.
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 concise sentences. Front-loaded with purpose. Every word is necessary; no redundancy.
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 read-only tool with 0 parameters and an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it.
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?
Tool has no parameters; schema coverage is 100%. Description adds no parameter info, but baseline for 0-param tools is 4. No additional meaning needed.
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?
Description clearly states the tool shows the authenticated account's remaining monthly generation quota, and usage context is given. It distinguishes from siblings (generate_etsy_seo, seerxo_analyze_listing, seerxo_optimize_listing, seerxo_suggest_keywords) which are about content creation/analysis.
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?
Explicitly says 'Use this when the user asks about Seerxo credits or usage'. While it does not list alternatives for similar queries, the sibling tools are distinct in function, so guidance is adequate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
seerxo_suggest_keywordsSuggest Etsy keywordsAInspect
Use this when the user wants Etsy keyword ideas for a product or listing. Returns ranked autosuggest phrases with relative demand and placement guidance; never fabricates search volumes. Uses one generation from the monthly quota.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| seed | No | Seed phrase to expand | |
| tags | No | Current Etsy tags | |
| title | No | Current Etsy listing title | |
| description | No | Current Etsy listing description | |
| product_name | No | Short product description, e.g. "handmade ceramic coffee mug, speckled glaze, 12oz" |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| seed | Yes | Normalized seed phrase used for suggestions. |
| usage | Yes | |
| source | Yes | Source used for keyword suggestions. |
| keywords | Yes | Keyword suggestions in Etsy autosuggest demand order. |
| confidence | Yes | Confidence in the available suggestions. |
Tool Definition Quality
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Discloses key behaviors: returns ranked autosuggest phrases, never fabricates search volumes, uses one generation from monthly quota. Annotations provide minimal safety info, so description adds valuable context.
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 with front-loaded usage instruction. Every sentence adds value: first tells when to use, second describes output and constraints. No waste.
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?
Covers input (Etsy listing context), output (ranked phrases with demand and placement guidance), and side effect (quota usage). Has output schema. Slightly missing edge case info, but generally complete.
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 has 100% description coverage for all 5 parameters, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond schema descriptions.
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?
Description clearly states verb ('suggest keywords') and resource ('Etsy keyword ideas for a product or listing'). Differentiates from siblings like generate_etsy_seo and seerxo_analyze_listing by focusing specifically on keyword suggestion.
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?
Explicitly says when to use ('when the user wants Etsy keyword ideas'). Implicitly excludes other use cases like SEO generation or analysis. No explicit alternatives listed, but context is clear.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Claim this connector by publishing a /.well-known/glama.json file on your server's domain with the following structure:
{
"$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/connector.json",
"maintainers": [{ "email": "your-email@example.com" }]
}The email address must match the email associated with your Glama account. Once published, Glama will automatically detect and verify the file within a few minutes.
Control your server's listing on Glama, including description and metadata
Access analytics and receive server usage reports
Get monitoring and health status updates for your server
Feature your server to boost visibility and reach more users
For users:
Full audit trail – every tool call is logged with inputs and outputs for compliance and debugging
Granular tool control – enable or disable individual tools per connector to limit what your AI agents can do
Centralized credential management – store and rotate API keys and OAuth tokens in one place
Change alerts – get notified when a connector changes its schema, adds or removes tools, or updates tool definitions, so nothing breaks silently
For server owners:
Proven adoption – public usage metrics on your listing show real-world traction and build trust with prospective users
Tool-level analytics – see which tools are being used most, helping you prioritize development and documentation
Direct user feedback – users can report issues and suggest improvements through the listing, giving you a channel you would not have otherwise
The connector status is unhealthy when Glama is unable to successfully connect to the server. This can happen for several reasons:
The server is experiencing an outage
The URL of the server is wrong
Credentials required to access the server are missing or invalid
If you are the owner of this MCP connector and would like to make modifications to the listing, including providing test credentials for accessing the server, please contact support@glama.ai.
Discussions
No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!
Your Connectors
Sign in to create a connector for this server.