Google Search Console MCP

Add Search Console property

sites.add

Idempotent

Add a website property to Google Search Console by specifying either sc-domain:example.com for domain properties or a full URL with protocol and trailing slash for URL-prefix properties.

Instructions

Add a new website property to your Google Search Console account. Note: Domain properties require sc-domain prefix (e.g., sc-domain:example.com), URL-prefix properties require full URL (e.g., https://example.com/).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site_url`	Yes	The Search Console property identifier, exactly as returned by sites.list. Two formats exist: domain properties use 'sc-domain:example.com'; URL-prefix properties use the full URL including protocol and trailing slash, e.g. 'https://www.example.com/'. Passing the wrong format returns a permission error even when the user owns the site — call sites.list first if unsure.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`message`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already indicate a mutating but non-destructive operation, and the description adds no side-effect or error behavior beyond the obvious 'Add' semantics. The format note is useful but is parameter constraint rather than behavioral disclosure.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and the critical format caveat isolated in a short Note. No filler words or redundant elaboration.

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

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter mutating tool with a detailed schema, an output schema, and annotations, the definition covers the essentials. It lacks a brief statement of prerequisites or expected results, but the schema compensates for the main risk of using the wrong identifier format.

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?

The input schema already provides 100% coverage of site_url, including both formats and a warning about permission errors. The description's note largely repeats that schema guidance and adds no new parameter semantics.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb ('Add') and resource ('new website property') against a Google Search Console account. The operation is unique among sibling tools like sites.list and sites.delete, so an agent can distinguish it without opening the schema.

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?

The phrase 'Add a new website property' implies when the tool should be used, but the description does not explicitly compare it with alternatives or say when not to use it. The format note is a prerequisite for the parameter, not a usage-routing guideline.

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

Deploy Server