Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
suede-skills-mcp

suede-skills-mcp

by JasonColapietro
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

Suede Copy SEO/AEO/AI EO Audit

suede_copy_seo_audit
Read-onlyIdempotent

Generates a Suede-specific SEO, AEO, and AI EO copy audit scaffold for a page, repo, or docs surface, helping teams assess content quality and search visibility.

Instructions

Create a Suede-specific SEO/AEO/AI EO copy audit scaffold for a page, repo, or docs surface.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "suede_copy_seo_audit"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoOptional URL to audit.
copyNoOptional pasted copy to audit.
pageTypeNoPage or docs type when no URL is available.
primaryIntentNoPrimary search intent or reader action.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYes
primaryIntentYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety and repeatability are covered. The description adds one real behavioral signal — that the output is a scaffold/template rather than a completed audit — but says nothing about whether a URL is fetched live, how inputs combine, or what happens with no inputs.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler and no restating of the title beyond what is needed. It is slightly dense with coined acronyms ("AEO/AI EO") that may not resolve for an agent, but nothing is wasteful.

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?

With a rich annotation set, a full output schema, and 100%-covered parameters, most of the burden is already carried by structured fields. The gap is that all four parameters are optional, and the description never states whether a zero-argument call is valid or what the minimum viable input is.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description does not add syntax, precedence, or interaction rules. Baseline 3 applies: the schema does the heavy lifting and the description only loosely echoes the page/repo/docs framing.

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 names a specific verb ("Create") and a specific artifact ("Suede-specific SEO/AEO/AI EO copy audit scaffold") scoped to pages, repos, or docs surfaces. The word "scaffold" usefully signals this produces a structured starting point rather than a finished audit. It does not differentiate from close siblings like suede_copy_check or suede_live_page_audit, keeping it out of 5 territory.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance and no mention of alternatives, despite two nearby siblings (suede_copy_check, suede_live_page_audit) that an agent could easily confuse with this one. Nothing tells the caller which input mode (url vs copy vs pageType) to choose or when this tool is the wrong pick.

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