Skip to main content
Glama
Akxan

google-seo-mcp

by Akxan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Keyword cannibalization

gsc_cannibalization
Read-onlyIdempotent

Identify queries where multiple pages compete for the same keyword, revealing competing pages with clicks, impressions, and positions to consolidate or differentiate content.

Instructions

Run this when rankings look stuck despite good content. Finds queries for which two or more pages receive impressions, i.e. pages competing against each other for the same keyword. Each result lists the competing pages with clicks, impressions and position so you can consolidate or differentiate them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topNo
endDateNoEnd: YYYY-MM-DD, today, yesterday or NdaysAgo (data lags 2-3 days).3daysAgo
filtersNoScope the analysis, e.g. page contains '/es/' for one language folder. Defaults to the whole property.
siteUrlYesSearch Console property, e.g. 'sc-domain:example.com' (see gsc_list_sites).
startDateNoStart: YYYY-MM-DD, today, yesterday or NdaysAgo (data lags 2-3 days).90daysAgo
searchTypeNoweb
minImpressionsPerPageNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.0
    • addedInput schema / properties / filters
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Scope the analysis, e.g. page contains '/es/' for one language folder. Defaults to the whole property.",
+  "items": {
+    "properties": {
+      "dimension": {
+        "enum": [
+          "query",
+          "page",
+          "country",
+          "device",
+          "searchAppearance"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "expression": {
+        "description": "Value; device: DESKTOP/MOBILE/TABLET, country: 3-letter code like 'usa'.",
+        "type": "string"
+      },
+      "operator": {
+        "default": "equals",
+        "enum": [
+          "equals",
+          "notEquals",
+          "contains",
+          "notContains",
+          "includingRegex",
+          "excludingRegex"
+        ],
+        "type": "string"
+      }
+    },
+    "required": [
+      "dimension",
+      "expression"
+    ],
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  "type": "array"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / siteUrl / description
      Previous value: -"Search Console property, e.g. 'sc-domain:example.com' or 'https://example.com/' (see gsc_list_sites)."New value: +"Search Console property, e.g. 'sc-domain:example.com' (see gsc_list_sites)."
  2. Changed5 schema fields changedv0.5.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / endDate / description
      Previous value: -"End date: YYYY-MM-DD, 'today', 'yesterday' or 'NdaysAgo' (e.g. '28daysAgo'). Search Console data lags ~2-3 days."New value: +"End: YYYY-MM-DD, today, yesterday or NdaysAgo (data lags 2-3 days)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / minImpressionsPerPage / maximum
      Added value: +9007199254740991
    • changedInput schema / properties / siteUrl / description
      Previous value: -"Property URL exactly as shown in Search Console, e.g. 'https://example.com/' or 'sc-domain:example.com'. Use gsc_list_sites to discover it."New value: +"Search Console property, e.g. 'sc-domain:example.com' or 'https://example.com/' (see gsc_list_sites)."
    • changedInput schema / properties / startDate / description
      Previous value: -"Start date: YYYY-MM-DD, 'today', 'yesterday' or 'NdaysAgo' (e.g. '28daysAgo'). Search Console data lags ~2-3 days."New value: +"Start: YYYY-MM-DD, today, yesterday or NdaysAgo (data lags 2-3 days)."
  3. First observedv0.3.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/openWorld/idempotent safety, so the description only needs to add operational behavior. It does: each result lists competing pages with clicks, impressions, and position, and it implies a follow-up action (consolidate or differentiate). No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded with the trigger condition and ending with the output format and intended action. Every sentence earns its place; there is no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description correctly takes on the job of explaining return values: competing pages plus clicks, impressions, and position. It does not mention default thresholds or result ordering, but defaults are visible in the schema and the core call pattern is clear.

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 only 57%, and the description adds no parameter-level guidance. It never mentions top, searchType, minImpressionsPerPage, or how filters and dates shape the analysis, leaving the agent to infer tuning from parameter names alone.

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?

The description names a precise detection logic: queries for which two or more pages receive impressions, i.e. cannibalization. It uses a specific verb ('Finds') and a clear resource, and it sets the tool apart from generic analytics siblings by tying it to stuck rankings despite good content.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

It gives an explicit trigger: 'Run this when rankings look stuck despite good content.' This tells an agent when to select the tool, though it does not name alternatives or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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