cfp-seo-agent

search_intent

Idempotent

Classify up to 10 keywords by search intent with probabilities, so you can decide whether each suits an informational, commercial, navigational, or transactional page.

Instructions

Search intent (informational, navigational, commercial, transactional) with probability for up to 10 keywords (DataForSEO Labs Search Intent). Use it to decide whether a keyword suits an informational, commercial or transactional page. Returns: JSON with keywords, not_classified. SANDBOX (development): returns dummy data, no payment. NOTE: Intent labels come from DataForSEO's classifier. Language coverage is determined by DataForSEO; results for non-English keywords are not guaranteed.

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": {
      "keywords": "<keywords>"
    },
    "name": "search_intent"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`keywords`	Yes	Keywords to look up: 1 to 10 entries, each up to 80 characters / 10 words. Lowercased, duplicates removed.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: sandbox returns dummy data with no payment, results come from DataForSEO's classifier, non-English coverage is not guaranteed, and the response keys (keywords, not_classified) are disclosed. It does not reconcile the readOnlyHint=false annotation — a production call presumably bills against the DataForSEO account, but the description only mentions payment in the sandbox case, leaving that behavior implicit.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the operation and label set, then scope, then caveats — a sensible order. Minor redundancy in the closing NOTE, where 'Intent labels come from DataForSEO's classifier' and 'Language coverage is determined by DataForSEO' repeat the same attribution twice.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a one-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: input limits, output keys, sandbox vs production data, and known accuracy limits for non-English keywords. Nothing material is missing.

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 single parameter has 100% schema coverage, which already documents the 1–10 item range, 80-character limit, lowercasing, and deduplication. The description restates the 'up to 10 keywords' limit but adds no syntax or format meaning 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.

Purpose5/5

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

Names a specific operation (classify keywords by search intent), the exact label set (informational, navigational, commercial, transactional) plus probability, the scope limit (up to 10 keywords), and the data source (DataForSEO Labs Search Intent). An agent can distinguish this from sibling keyword tools like keyword_metrics or keyword_difficulty 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 Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly frames the decision it supports: 'Use it to decide whether a keyword suits an informational, commercial or transactional page.' That is clear usage context, but no exclusion or alternative is named (e.g., when to prefer keyword_metrics or keyword_ideas instead), so it falls short of the 5 bar.

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