ga4-seo-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

sc_list_sites

Read-only

List the Search Console sites you can access, with each site URL and permission level, so you can select the right property for audits or setup.

Instructions

List the Search Console sites you can access.

Each entry has siteUrl ('sc-domain:example.com' for domain properties or a URL prefix like 'https://example.com/') and permissionLevel ('siteOwner', 'siteFullUser', 'siteRestrictedUser' or 'siteUnverifiedUser').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 19, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful return-shape context (siteUrl conventions and the four permissionLevel values), but since an output schema exists this is partly redundant and no pagination or scoping behavior is disclosed.

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 tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the purpose before the field detail. Every sentence carries information and nothing is padded.

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?

For a zero-parameter list tool with an output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is essentially complete. Only the relationship to the sibling list tools is left unaddressed.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case. There is no parameter surface for the description to clarify or omit.

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 (List) and resource (Search Console sites you can access), so the agent knows it enumerates accessible properties. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'list_properties', which could plausibly be confused with this tool.

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 named alternatives. Usage is only weakly implied by 'sites you can access', and the agent is left to infer whether list_properties or list_account_summaries is the correct entry point.

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