Fetches top related Google Trends queries for one or more explore terms, returning an empty array when no rows match your filters.
Google Trends explore top queries. Returns the Top related queries widget for one or more Google Trends explore terms. Returns an empty queries array when Google returns no rows for the requested term/filter combination.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| request | Yes | Explore request |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Input schema / properties / request / propertiesAdded value: +{
+ "category": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ },
+ "geo": {
+ "enum": [
+ "WORLDWIDE",
+ "AF",
+ "AX",
+ "AL",
+ "DZ",
+ "AS",
+ "AD",
+ "AO",
+ "AI",
+ "AQ",
+ "AG",
+ "AR",
+ "AM",
+ "AW",
+ "AU",
+ "AT",
+ "AZ",
+ "BS",
+ "BH",
+ "BD",
+ "BB",
+ "BY",
+ "BE",
+ "BZ",
+ "BJ",
+ "BM",
+ "BT",
+ "BO",
+ "BA",
+ "BW",
+ "BV",
+ "BR",
+ "IO",
+ "VG",
+ "BN",
+ "BG",
+ "BF",
+ "BI",
+ "KH",
+ "CM",
+ "CA",
+ "CV",
+ "BQ",
+ "KY",
+ "CF",
+ "TD",
+ "CL",
+ "CN",
+ "CX",
+ "CC",
+ "CO",
+ "KM",
+ "CG",
+ "CD",
+ "CK",
+ "CR",
+ "CI",
+ "HR",
+ "CU",
+ "CW",
+ "CY",
+ "CZ",
+ "DK",
+ "DJ",
+ "DM",
+ "DO",
+ "EC",
+ "EG",
+ "SV",
+ "GQ",
+ "ER",
+ "EE",
+ "SZ",
+ "ET",
+ "FK",
+ "FO",
+ "FJ",
+ "FI",
+ "FR",
+ "GF",
+ "PF",
+ "TF",
+ "GA",
+ "GM",
+ "GE",
+ "DE",
+ "GH",
+ "GI",
+ "GR",
+ "GL",
+ "GD",
+ "GP",
+ "GU",
+ "GT",
+ "GG",
+ "GN",
+ "GW",
+ "GY",
+ "HT",
+ "HM",
+ "HN",
+ "HK",
+ "HU",
+ "IS",
+ "IN",
+ "ID",
+ "IR",
+ "IQ",
+ "IE",
+ "IM",
+ "IL",
+ "IT",
+ "JM",
+ "JP",
+ "JE",
+ "JO",
+ "KZ",
+ "KE",
+ "KI",
+ "XK",
+ "KW",
+ "KG",
+ "LA",
+ "LV",
+ "LB",
+ "LS",
+ "LR",
+ "LY",
+ "LI",
+ "LT",
+ "LU",
+ "MO",
+ "MG",
+ "MW",
+ "MY",
+ "MV",
+ "ML",
+ "MT",
+ "MH",
+ "MQ",
+ "MR",
+ "MU",
+ "YT",
+ "MX",
+ "FM",
+ "MD",
+ "MC",
+ "MN",
+ "ME",
+ "MS",
+ "MA",
+ "MZ",
+ "MM",
+ "NA",
+ "NR",
+ "NP",
+ "NL",
+ "NC",
+ "NZ",
+ "NI",
+ "NE",
+ "NG",
+ "NU",
+ "NF",
+ "KP",
+ "MK",
+ "MP",
+ "NO",
+ "OM",
+ "PK",
+ "PW",
+ "PS",
+ "PA",
+ "PG",
+ "PY",
+ "PE",
+ "PH",
+ "PN",
+ "PL",
+ "PT",
+ "PR",
+ "QA",
+ "RE",
+ "RO",
+ "RU",
+ "RW",
+ "WS",
+ "SM",
+ "ST",
+ "SA",
+ "SN",
+ "RS",
+ "SC",
+ "SL",
+ "SG",
+ "SX",
+ "SK",
+ "SI",
+ "SB",
+ "SO",
+ "ZA",
+ "GS",
+ "KR",
+ "SS",
+ "ES",
+ "LK",
+ "BL",
+ "SH",
+ "KN",
+ "LC",
+ "MF",
+ "PM",
+ "VC",
+ "SD",
+ "SR",
+ "SJ",
+ "SE",
+ "CH",
+ "SY",
+ "TW",
+ "TJ",
+ "TZ",
+ "TH",
+ "TL",
+ "TG",
+ "TK",
+ "TO",
+ "TT",
+ "TN",
+ "TR",
+ "TM",
+ "TC",
+ "TV",
+ "UM",
+ "VI",
+ "UG",
+ "UA",
+ "AE",
+ "GB",
+ "US",
+ "UY",
+ "UZ",
+ "VU",
+ "VA",
+ "VE",
+ "VN",
+ "WF",
+ "EH",
+ "YE",
+ "ZM",
+ "ZW"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "hl": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "keywords": {
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "property": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "time_range": {
+ "enum": [
+ "now 1-H",
+ "now 4-H",
+ "now 1-d",
+ "now 7-d",
+ "today 1-m",
+ "today 3-m",
+ "today 12-m",
+ "today 5-y",
+ "all"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": {
+ "enum": [
+ "web",
+ "image",
+ "news",
+ "youtube",
+ "shopping"
+ ],
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "tz": {
+ "type": "integer"
+ }
+}v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a specific edge case—returns an empty queries array when no rows exist—which is helpful. However, it omits other behavioral aspects like rate limits, authentication, or read-only nature (though that's likely evident). The single disclosure is useful but minimal.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Two sentences, no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, and the empty-array behavior is appended efficiently. Every word earns its place; nothing is redundant.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
The tool has a nested request object with many optional fields and no output schema. The description doesn't explain how to construct a valid request (e.g., is keywords required?), nor does it clarify the return structure beyond 'queries array.' It's sufficient for a simple tool, but gaps remain for an agent to call it correctly without additional schema exploration.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The schema covers the request object at 100% for the top-level parameter, but inner properties lack descriptions. The description adds meaning by explaining that keywords are 'explore terms' and mentioning 'filter combination,' which hints at geo, time_range, etc. This provides some semantics beyond the raw schema, but it doesn't clarify individual filter fields or their constraints.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool returns the 'Top related queries widget' for Google Trends explore terms, which is a specific verb-resource pair. The name and description distinguish it from sibling tools like rising_queries or related_topics, though it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives. It's concise and unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings (e.g., interest_over_time, related_topics). The description implies it's for top queries but doesn't state conditions or exclusions. An agent would have to infer usage from the name and description alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.