Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
gsc-mcp

gsc-mcp

by FlorianBruniaux
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

submit_batch

Submit multiple URLs to Google Indexing API in HTTP batches of 100. Returns per-URL results, total submitted/error counts, and remaining daily quota.

Instructions

Submit multiple URLs to the Google Indexing API in HTTP batches of 100.

Returns per-URL results, total submitted/error counts, and remaining daily quota. Daily limit is 200 requests total. A quota_warning is added to the response when usage exceeds 180. url_type: 'URL_UPDATED' (default) or 'URL_DELETED'.

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": {
      "urls": "<urls>"
    },
    "name": "submit_batch"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYes
url_typeNoURL_UPDATED

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.4.1

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, but the description fully discloses behavior: batching mechanism, daily quota limits, optional url_type with default, and response contents (per-URL results, counts, quota warning).

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?

Very concise: three sentences covering action, return details, quota, and default parameter values. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description still adds value by summarizing returns (per-URL results, counts, quota remaining) and the quota_warning condition. The tool is moderately complex with two parameters, and the description covers all essential aspects without gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, so description carries full burden. It explains the 'urls' parameter as a batch of URLs, and clarifies the 'url_type' parameter values (URL_UPDATED default, URL_DELETED) and its purpose.

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 clearly states the verb 'submit', resource 'multiple URLs', and scope 'HTTP batches of 100'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'submit_url' by explicitly mentioning batching and multiple URLs.

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?

Provides important usage constraints: daily limit of 200 requests, batch size of 100, and a warning threshold. Does not explicitly tell when to use this versus the single URL tool, but the mention of batching implies use for multiple URLs.

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