Skip to main content
Glama
Mrshahidali420

Google Search Console MCP Server

gsc_check_status

Check whether each URL is indexed by Google Search via the URL Inspection API, returning statuses like indexed, not indexed, or unknown. Read-only; never requests indexing.

Instructions

Check whether each URL is indexed by Google Search, via the URL Inspection API.

READ-ONLY: this tool inspects current index status and submits NOTHING. It never requests indexing and never spends a Request-Indexing slot. No tool here does yet — requesting indexing is not built, so an assistant asked to get a URL indexed should say so rather than reaching for this one, which answers a different question and spends a different budget doing it. This tool DOES spend URL Inspection quota, a separate per-property budget of 2,000 calls a day and roughly 600 a minute (see gsc_quota) — one call per URL inspected.

concurrency defaults to the configured inspect_concurrency (config.load()["inspect_concurrency"]) when omitted.

Properties come from the local store, the same one gsc_list_sites populates. If the store has never been synced — e.g. this is the very first call this install has ever made — it is synced automatically first, so a first-ever gsc_check_status call does not fail with "no property matches" purely because nothing has been synced yet.

Returns {"rows": [...], "checked": int, "skipped_quota": [...], "quota": {...}}. "quota" is per property, and its daily_free_at_gate/minute_free_at_gate are the headroom measured BEFORE this call reserved its own budget — they are a record of what the gate saw, not current headroom, and are already stale by the size of this batch by the time you read them. gsc_quota's similarly-shaped daily_free/minute_free are the ones measured now; do not compare the two pairs or plan a second batch against these. binding_at_gate (here and on each "skipped_quota" entry) carries the suffix for the same reason: it names only the exhausted INSPECTION window as seen at the gate, where gsc_quota's binding covers the submission budget too and is read now. Each row is {"url", "status", "detail", "unverified"}. status is one of: indexed, crawled_not_indexed, discovered_not_indexed, unknown_to_google, redirect, noindex, duplicate, alternate_canonical, not_found, soft_404, blocked_robots, no_property, error. no_property means no Search Console property in this account covers that URL's host. unverified is True when a concurrent burst produced a suspect result (unknown_to_google or error) that a sequential re-check could not confirm before quota or time ran out — treat such a row as UNKNOWN, not as a confirmed "not indexed".

On a missing, expired, or rejected token, returns {"ok": False, "error": "auth_required", "fix": ...} instead of raising; if no OAuth client is configured at all, returns {"ok": False, "error": "not_configured", "fix": ...}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYes
concurrencyNo
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It extensively discloses behavioral traits: read-only nature, that it spends URL Inspection quota with specific limits, the concurrency default, automatic local-store sync, exact return format including stale quota field semantics, the meaning of 'unverified' status, and auth error return patterns. This goes far beyond minimal disclosure.

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?

Although lengthy, every paragraph addresses a distinct concern: purpose, budget/quota, concurrency, store sync, return schema, and error handling. The core purpose is front-loaded in one sentence, and the complex quota timing caveats justify the additional detail. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description fully details the return structure, including a full list of status enum values, the 'no_property' and 'unverified' edge cases, and auth error return objects. It also explains quota measurement timing issues that could otherwise lead to misuse. For a complex tool, this is comprehensive.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains the concurrency parameter's default via config.load() and the per-URL quota implication, and implies urls semantics with 'each URL' and 'one call per URL inspected'. However, it doesn't specify URL format requirements (e.g., absolute vs. relative, scheme), so it's not fully exhaustive.

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 first sentence states precisely what the tool does: 'Check whether each URL is indexed by Google Search, via the URL Inspection API.' It clearly distinguishes itself from requesting indexing ('answers a different question and spends a different budget doing it') and references sibling tools like gsc_quota, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 explicitly says when NOT to use it, stating an assistant asked to get a URL indexed 'should say so rather than reaching for this one'. It also references gsc_quota for quota details and gsc_list_sites for the property store, with added context about automatic first-call syncing, providing clear guidance on use vs. alternatives.

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