PR-CY MCP

get_pages_summary

Получить сводку по страницам с расширенными фильтрами из Google Search Console и/или Яндекс.Вебмастер.

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": {
      "project_id": "<project_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_pages_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	No	JSON-объект фильтра по URL. Формат: {"value": "<строка>", "compare_type": "equals\|notEquals\|startsWith\|endsWith\|contains\|notContains\|regex"}. compare_type опционален, по умолчанию contains. Для regex используется синтаксис RE2.
`sort`	No	Сортировка. Формат: поле1,-поле2 (- означает убывание). Пример: -impressions,ctr. Поля можно указывать в camelCase или snake_case (diffClicks и diff_clicks эквивалентны).	-impressions
`limit`	No	Количество элементов на странице
`offset`	No	Смещение элементов
`source`	No	Источник данных: gsc, webmaster или all.	all
`date_to`	No	Дата окончания периода. Формат YYYY-MM-DD. Должна быть не позже (today - 3 days). Если не указана, используется (today - 3 days). Должна быть >= date_from. Пример: 2024-02-28.
`date_from`	No	Дата начала периода. Формат YYYY-MM-DD. Должна быть не позже (today - 3 days). Если не указана, используется (today - 13 days). Должна быть <= date_to. Пример: 2024-02-26.
`project_id`	Yes	Идентификатор проекта.
`prev_date_to`	No	Дата окончания предыдущего периода. Формат YYYY-MM-DD. Обязательна вместе с prev_date_from. Должна быть не позже (today - 3 days) и >= prev_date_from. Пример: 2024-02-24.
`metrics_filter`	No	Диапазонный фильтр по метрикам
`prev_date_from`	No	Дата начала предыдущего периода. Формат YYYY-MM-DD. Обязательна вместе с prev_date_to. Должна быть не позже (today - 3 days) и <= prev_date_to. Пример: 2024-02-22.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

B3.2/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only states what data is returned at a high level. It does not disclose that results are paginated (limit/offset), that comparison periods must be supplied in pairs, or that there are date-boundary constraints — all of which materially affect correct invocation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, but for an eleven-parameter tool with comparison periods it is arguably too terse to earn the last point.

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?

The output schema and rich parameter descriptions cover return values and filter syntax, so the description is not required to explain those. Still, for a complex aggregating tool that merges two sources and supports previous-period comparison, it omits the comparison behavior and the relationship to get_pages_summary_by_dates, leaving meaningful gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all eleven parameters, including the url filter syntax, sort format, and date constraints, are already fully documented in the schema. The description contributes no additional parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Получить сводку') and resource ('по страницам'), and identifies the data sources (Google Search Console, Яндекс.Вебмастер) plus 'расширенными фильтрами'. However it never mentions or distinguishes it from the closely related sibling 'get_pages_summary_by_dates', so an agent cannot tell which one to pick from the description alone.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by the phrase 'с расширенными фильтрами', with no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative such as get_pages_summary_by_dates. The agent must infer routing from sibling names.

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

All PR-CY MCP 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?