Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
AgentSEO MCP Server

AgentSEO MCP Server

by AgentSEO-dev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript

AgentSEO Content Brief

agentseo_content_brief
Destructive

Generate a production-ready content brief from live SERP intent for writers and coding agents; add keyword, audience, and page type to guide drafting and implementation.

Instructions

Turn live SERP intent into a production-ready content brief for writers and coding agents. Uses AgentSEO credits; repeating the call can create new charged work.

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": {
      "keyword": "<keyword>"
    },
    "name": "agentseo_content_brief"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
syncNoRequest a bounded wait for completion when true. The API can still return a pending job; retain its job ID and poll agentseo_job_status instead of repeating this charged call. False returns a queued job without waiting. Type: Boolean. Default: true.
deviceNoDevice search-result profile used for the analysis. Type: String. Accepted values: "desktop", "mobile". Default: "desktop".desktop
targetNoYour target brand, domain or URL used to scope this workflow; supply the entity you want assessed. Type: String. Optional; no client default.
keywordYesSearch keyword or phrase to analyze for this workflow. Type: String. Required.
audienceNoIntended reader or buyer group in plain language; do not include unnecessary personal data. Type: String. Optional; no client default.
languageNoSupported search language code, for example en for English. Type: String. Default: "en".en
locationNoSupported geographic search-market name, for example United States; this is not a coordinate pair. Type: String. Default: "United States".United States
page_typeNoPage format or classification for this record; select one of the accepted values. Type: String. Accepted values: "auto", "blog_post", "landing_page", "comparison_page", "guide", "tool_page". Default: "auto".auto
brand_voiceNoWriting voice to use for the content recommendations. Type: String. Accepted values: "neutral", "expert", "friendly", "bold", "technical". Default: "expert".expert
brief_depthNoAmount of implementation detail requested in the content brief. Type: String. Accepted values: "standard", "detailed". Default: "standard".standard
include_serp_outlineNoInclude a search-result-informed page outline in the brief when true. Type: Boolean. Default: true.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed11 schema fields changedv0.1.5
    • changedInput schema / properties / audience / description
      Previous value: -"Optional audience description"New value: +"Intended reader or buyer group in plain language; do not include unnecessary personal data. Type: String. Optional; no client default."
    • addedInput schema / properties / brand_voice / description
      Added value: +"Writing voice to use for the content recommendations. Type: String. Accepted values: \"neutral\", \"expert\", \"friendly\", \"bold\", \"technical\". Default: \"expert\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / brief_depth / description
      Added value: +"Amount of implementation detail requested in the content brief. Type: String. Accepted values: \"standard\", \"detailed\". Default: \"standard\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / device / description
      Added value: +"Device search-result profile used for the analysis. Type: String. Accepted values: \"desktop\", \"mobile\". Default: \"desktop\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / include_serp_outline / description
      Added value: +"Include a search-result-informed page outline in the brief when true. Type: Boolean. Default: true."
    • changedInput schema / properties / keyword / description
      Previous value: -"Target keyword"New value: +"Search keyword or phrase to analyze for this workflow. Type: String. Required."
    • addedInput schema / properties / language / description
      Added value: +"Supported search language code, for example en for English. Type: String. Default: \"en\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / location / description
      Added value: +"Supported geographic search-market name, for example United States; this is not a coordinate pair. Type: String. Default: \"United States\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / page_type / description
      Added value: +"Page format or classification for this record; select one of the accepted values. Type: String. Accepted values: \"auto\", \"blog_post\", \"landing_page\", \"comparison_page\", \"guide\", \"tool_page\". Default: \"auto\"."
    • addedInput schema / properties / sync / description
      Added value: +"Request a bounded wait for completion when true. The API can still return a pending job; retain its job ID and poll agentseo_job_status instead of repeating this charged call. False returns a queued job without waiting. Type: Boolean. Default: true."
    • changedInput schema / properties / target / description
      Previous value: -"Optional target brand, domain, or product"New value: +"Your target brand, domain or URL used to scope this workflow; supply the entity you want assessed. Type: String. Optional; no client default."
  2. First observedv0.1.4

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower, and the description still contributes the key operational fact: the call consumes credits and repetition can incur new charges. It does not explain what the destructive aspect means in practice (e.g. whether existing briefs are overwritten) or what comes back, which keeps it below a 5.

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 sentences, zero filler, with the core capability front-loaded and the cost caveat immediately after. Nothing is repeated from structured fields and nothing needs to be trimmed.

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 an 11-parameter charged job tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose and cost but not the return shape (brief payload, job ID when pending) or prerequisites such as needing an account with credits. The polling advice lives only in the sync parameter's schema text, leaving the description itself thin on lifecycle behaviour.

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 the schema already documents all 11 parameters including enums and defaults, and the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. Baseline 3 applies since the description neither compensates nor detracts.

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 states a specific verb and resource: turning live SERP intent into a production-ready content brief for writers and coding agents. That is clearly distinct from audit or backlink siblings, but it does not name the near-neighbours it could be confused with (agentseo_content_serp_outline, agentseo_content_refresh_brief, agentseo_opportunities_brief).

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 line about AgentSEO credits and repeating the call creating new charged work implicitly tells an agent to avoid re-invoking and to poll a job instead, which is real guidance. However, there is no explicit statement of when to choose this brief tool over the outline, refresh-brief or opportunities-brief siblings, so the routing decision is left to inference.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools