AppTrack Ninja

Tracked keyword ranks

get_tracked_keywords

Read-onlyIdempotent

Keyword table for one tracked app: popularity, difficulty, position, and the day-over-day change.

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": {
      "appId": "<appId>"
    },
    "name": "get_tracked_keywords"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`appId`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

B3.1/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare the read-only, idempotent, non-destructive nature of the tool. The description adds useful context about what the returned table contains, but it does not disclose pagination, sorting, limits, authorization requirements, or response structure beyond the metric names.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no redundant text. Every phrase contributes to communicating the resource and returned metrics.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description gives helpful output-field context and annotations cover safety. However, it leaves the only parameter semantically undefined and omits any mention of result cardinality or pagination behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the single required appId parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description indirectly implies that it takes one tracked app, but it does not name appId, explain its format, or clarify that it must be a valid tracked-app identifier.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description identifies a specific resource: the keyword table for one tracked app, including the metrics returned (popularity, difficulty, position, day-over-day change). It is clear enough to distinguish from generic keyword tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_keyword_history.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_keyword_history or get_app_ranks. The phrase 'for one tracked app' implies the appId requirement, but no conditions or exclusions are stated.

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

All AppTrack Ninja tools Inspect

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

Need Help?