mcp-seo-audit

get_advanced_search_analytics

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query Google Search Console data with sorting, regex filters, pagination, and custom dimensions to analyze clicks, impressions, CTR, and position.

Instructions

Get advanced search analytics with sorting, filtering (including regex), and pagination.

Args:
    site_url: Exact GSC property URL (e.g. "sc-domain:example.com")
    start_date: Inclusive start date YYYY-MM-DD (defaults to 28-day window ending at end_date)
    end_date: Inclusive end date YYYY-MM-DD (defaults to today in Pacific time)
    dimensions: Dimensions comma-separated (query,page,device,country,date,searchAppearance)
    search_type: WEB, IMAGE, VIDEO, NEWS, DISCOVER
    row_limit: Max rows (up to 25000)
    start_row: Starting row for pagination
    sort_by: Metric to sort returned API page locally (clicks, impressions, ctr, position)
    sort_direction: ascending or descending
    filter_dimension: Single filter dimension (query, page, country, device)
    filter_operator: contains, equals, notContains, notEquals, includingRegex, excludingRegex
    filter_expression: Filter value
    filters: JSON array of filter objects for AND logic. Each needs dimension, operator, expression.
    data_state: "all" (default) or "final" (confirmed only, 2-3 day lag)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`filters`	No
`sort_by`	No	clicks
`end_date`	No
`site_url`	Yes
`row_limit`	No
`start_row`	No
`data_state`	No
`dimensions`	No	query
`start_date`	No
`search_type`	No	WEB
`sort_direction`	No	descending
`filter_operator`	No	contains
`filter_dimension`	No
`filter_expression`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.0Apr 17, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare this as a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world operation, covering the safety profile. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the data_state 'final' option has a 2-3 day lag, sort_by operates locally on the returned API page, and filters combine with AND logic. It does not mention rate limits or authentication needs, but the added detail is substantial.

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?

The first sentence front-loads the tool's purpose, then the remaining content is a clean, structured args list. Given 14 parameters, the length is appropriate and no sentence is wasted, though it could be slightly tighter by separating usage notes from pure parameter definitions.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a tool with 14 parameters and many sibling analytics tools, the description covers parameters completely but omits any routing guidance or prerequisites (e.g., that site_url must be a verified GSC property). The output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the lack of when-to-use context leaves a significant gap.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the full semantic burden for 14 parameters. It does so thoroughly: date formats and defaults, dimension values, search type enums, row/pagination limits, sort metrics and direction, filter operators including regex, filter JSON structure, and data_state meaning. This is exactly the compensation required for a zero-coverage schema.

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?

The description states a specific verb (Get) and resource (advanced search analytics), and lists concrete capabilities: sorting, filtering including regex, and pagination. It does not differentiate this tool from the sibling get_search_analytics, so an agent cannot tell when this advanced variant is preferred over the basic one.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_search_analytics, get_performance_overview, or compare_search_periods. It only documents parameters, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name.

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

Deploy Server