Skip to main content
Glama
GlobalMatchHub

SearchLink Lite

by GlobalMatchHub
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Check if a page is indexed

inspect_url
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether a page is indexed on Google, view coverage state, last crawl time, canonical URL, and detect robots or fetch issues. Use to answer 'Is this page on Google?'

Instructions

Asks Google's URL Inspection API about one page: whether it is indexed, the coverage state, last crawl time, the canonical Google chose versus the one you declared, and robots or fetch problems. Use for "is this page on Google?" questions. For on-page problems use page_check. Read-only; Google allows about 2,000 inspections a day per property.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesFull URL of the page to inspect, including https://. It must belong to the site given.
siteYesThe Search Console property to read. Accepts "example.com", "https://example.com/" or "sc-domain:example.com". Call list_sites first if unsure which properties exist.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv0.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / site / description
      Previous value: -"Your site, e.g. \"example.com\". Use list_sites to see options."New value: +"The Search Console property to read. Accepts \"example.com\", \"https://example.com/\" or \"sc-domain:example.com\". Call list_sites first if unsure which properties exist."
    • changedInput schema / properties / url / description
      Previous value: -"Full page URL"New value: +"Full URL of the page to inspect, including https://. It must belong to the site given."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it is read-only and has a daily rate limit of about 2,000 inspections per property. It also discloses what kind of results the agent can expect, such as indexed status and canonical choices, which is valuable given there is no output schema.

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?

The description is three tight sentences that front-load the tool's core purpose, then quickly add use case, alternatives, safety, and rate-limit context. Every sentence earns its place with no redundant or filler content.

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 two-parameter read-only inspection tool, the description is complete: parameters are fully documented in the schema, annotations cover safety and idempotency, and the description enumerates the expected return information despite the lack of an output schema. The rate limit is an important operational detail that is included. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and call the tool correctly.

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 input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters at 100% coverage, so the schema carries the parameter documentation burden. The tool description does not add new semantic detail about the parameters beyond what the schema states, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource: it asks Google's URL Inspection API about one page. It lists the exact information returned (indexed status, coverage state, last crawl, canonical choices, robots/fetch problems) and clearly differentiates this from the sibling page_check tool. An agent can immediately tell what this tool does and what it does not do.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says to use this tool for "is this page on Google?" questions and names page_check as the alternative for on-page problems. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, leaving little to inference.

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