Skip to main content
Glama
Mrshahidali420

Google Search Console MCP Server

gsc_audit

Get a point-in-time snapshot of indexation for a property without network calls. Returns indexed/unindexed counts, reason breakdown, and actionable submittable URL counts to audit indexing status.

Instructions

The current indexation position for one property, as structured data.

Reads the local store only: no network call, no quota spent. It reports what the last inspection found, which is why the payload carries as_at — run gsc_find_unindexed first if the picture is stale, and check the stale count to see how much of it is.

Point-in-time by design. There are no movement numbers — nothing "moved to indexed", nothing "de-indexed" — because the store keeps no status history, and a zero in a field like that would read as a measurement that found no change rather than as an absence of data. basis says so in the payload.

Returns counts (total_known, checked, indexed, unindexed, undetermined, never_checked, stale), indexed_pct (null when nothing has been checked), a by_reason histogram over the ten reason codes, and three action counts: submittable, needs_site_access and no_action_needed. Every reason code is in exactly one of the three, so they sum to unindexed. submittable counts URLs a quota slot can move, not URLs to submit right now: it includes crawled-not-indexed, usually the largest bucket, where Google has already fetched the page and passed — a re-crawl can reverse that, but only after the page changes. Read each row's action before spending slots. Rendering all this — prose, table, chart — is yours to do.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full transparency burden. It thoroughly discloses behavioral traits: no network call, no quota usage, point-in-time snapshot, no movement numbers due to no status history, and explains how to interpret zeros (absence of data). It also reveals the `basis` field and the meaning of `stale`.

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 description is well-structured and front-loaded with the most critical information, but it is somewhat verbose. Each sentence conveys relevant detail, yet some redundancy exists (e.g., repeating local-only nature). Overall, it is appropriately sized for the complexity and manages to stay organized.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It explains all return fields, edge cases (e.g., null indexed_pct when nothing checked), the meaning of action counts, and how to interpret the data. It also situates the tool among siblings for stale-vs-fresh scenarios.

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 description refers to 'one property' and implies the `site` parameter is that property identifier, but it does not explicitly describe the parameter's format, allowed values, or how to obtain it. With schema description coverage at 0%, the description should compensate more, but it adds only minimal meaning beyond the schema's title.

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 identifies the tool's function: reporting the current indexation position for one property from the local store. It uses specific verbs and resource scope, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explicitly naming gsc_find_unindexed as an alternative for stale data.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: it states this is a local read-only operation with no quota cost, and instructs to run gsc_find_unindexed first if the picture is stale. It also cautions about the correct interpretation of 'submittable' and urges reading each row's 'action' before spending quota slots.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Mrshahidali420/google-search-console-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server