get_domain_traffic
Get traffic metrics for a domain
Input Schema
TableJSON Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| domain | Yes | Domain to analyze (e.g., example.com) | |
| country | No | Country code (empty string for Global, 'us' for United States, etc.) |
xpay✦ Marketing Collection
Schema Changelog
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
- First observed
TDQS
C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, data freshness, rate limits, or what 'traffic metrics' specifically includes. For a read operation, it lacks any detail that would help an agent anticipate the tool's behavior.
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 concise sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Completeness2/5
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description must explain what will be returned and in what form. It only says 'traffic metrics' without specifying metrics types or behavior. This is inadequate for an agent to fully understand the tool's output and fit within the broader tool context.
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 coverage is 100% as both parameters have descriptions. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. It does not explain how the country parameter affects results or domain format nuances.
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 clearly states the tool gets traffic metrics for a domain, identifying the specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate between this tool and siblings like get_url_traffic or get_domain_keywords, which could also involve traffic-related data.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description is a single sentence with no usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.