Citation Intelligence MCP

signals_ai_overview

Idempotent

Check whether Google shows an AI Overview for a query and which URLs it cites. Requires SerpAPI key.

Instructions

Check whether Google shows an AI Overview for a query, and which URLs it cites. Uses SerpAPI (free tier: 100/month). Set SERPAPI_KEY.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`hl`	No	Language code, default 'en'.	en
`query`	Yes	Search query to check for Google AI Overview.
`location`	No	Location string, e.g. 'United States'. Affects AI Overview eligibility.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	The query checked.
`cached`	Yes	Whether the result was served from local cache.
`sources`	Yes	URLs cited in the AI Overview.
`fetched_at`	Yes	UTC ISO-8601 timestamp.
`ai_overview_text`	Yes	AI Overview text, if present.
`ai_overview_present`	Yes	Whether Google returned an AI Overview for this query.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv0.1.2Oct 2, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond annotations by disclosing the external dependency (SerpAPI), the required credential (SERPAPI_KEY), and a quota limit (free tier 100/month) that materially affects call frequency. Annotations already cover idempotency and openness; the quota and auth disclosures are exactly the added value the description should provide.

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 core purpose, followed immediately by the dependency and setup requirement. Zero 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the auth/quota prerequisites are stated. The only minor gap is that location's effect on AI Overview eligibility is left to the schema rather than reinforced in the description.

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 three parameters (query, hl, location) are already documented with defaults and semantics. The description adds no parameter detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource: check AI Overview presence and cited URLs for a query. This is clearly distinct from siblings like signals_answer_box or audit_schema, though it does not explicitly name which sibling to prefer. A near-complete purpose statement.

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?

No when-to-use guidance and no alternative named. The only operational note is the SerpAPI dependency and free-tier quota, which is useful context but not usage routing. An agent must infer when this beats signals_answer_box or citations_check.

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