seo-geo-mcp-server

XML Sitemap Check

sitemap_check

Read-onlyIdempotent

Find and validate an XML sitemap: discover it via robots.txt or standard paths, then check URL count, size, lastmod validity, off-origin URLs, and duplicates.

Instructions

Discover, fetch and validate an XML sitemap. Finds it via the robots.txt Sitemap: directive, then falls back to /sitemap.xml, /sitemap_index.xml and /sitemap-index.xml. Handles sitemap indexes (following children) and gzipped sitemaps.

Validates: URL count against the 50,000 limit, uncompressed size against 50 MiB, presence and W3C-datetime validity, URLs pointing off-origin, http:// URLs, and duplicates.

Args:

site (string): domain or any URL on it.
sitemap_url (string, optional): explicit sitemap URL.
follow_children (number): child sitemaps of an index to follow (default 3).
response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): output format (default 'markdown').

Returns: { found, type, url_count, child_sitemaps[], with_lastmod, invalid_lastmod[], newest_lastmod, off_origin_urls[], exceeds_url_limit, discovered_via, score, grade, findings[] }.

Example: "Check the sitemap for example.com" -> sitemap_check(site="example.com").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes	Domain or any URL on it, e.g. 'example.com'.
`sitemap_url`	No	Explicit sitemap URL. Omit to discover it via robots.txt, then the conventional paths.
`follow_children`	No	How many child sitemaps of an index to follow (default 3).
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' for a human-readable summary (default) or 'json' for the full structured payload.	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`url`	Yes
`type`	Yes
`bytes`	Yes
`found`	Yes
`grade`	Yes
`score`	Yes
`status`	Yes
`entries`	Yes
`findings`	Yes
`url_count`	Yes
`with_lastmod`	Yes
`child_sitemaps`	Yes
`discovered_via`	Yes
`duplicate_urls`	Yes
`newest_lastmod`	Yes
`non_https_urls`	Yes
`oldest_lastmod`	Yes
`invalid_lastmod`	Yes
`off_origin_urls`	Yes
`exceeds_url_limit`	Yes
`exceeds_size_limit`	Yes
`child_sitemaps_followed`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv1.2.0Sep 16, 2026

changedInput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedOutput schema / $schema

Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"

First observedv1.0.0Aug 3, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/openWorld/idempotent annotations, the description adds real behavioral detail: robots.txt discovery, fallback paths, index/gzip handling, exact limits (50,000 URLs, 50 MiB), lastmod validation, off-origin checking, duplicate detection, and the returned fields. This gives the agent a precise model of what the tool does without contradicting the annotations.

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 front-loaded with purpose, then discovery logic, validation criteria, arguments, return payload, and an example. Although it is long, each section contributes directly to selecting and invoking the tool correctly, and the structure is easy to scan.

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?

The definition covers discovery strategy, supported edge cases, validation rules, parameter behavior, return fields, and even includes an example invocation. Given the output schema is available, nothing critical is missing for an agent to call this 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, and the description largely restates what the schema already says: site semantics, sitemap_url discovery behavior, follow_children default, and response_format choices. It adds little new parameter-level meaning beyond the structured schema, so the baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Discover, fetch and validate an XML sitemap.' It then details the discovery fallbacks and validation checks, which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like robots_txt_check or llms_txt_check by focusing on the XML sitemap artifact and its rules.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The intended usage is clear: call this tool when an XML sitemap needs to be found, fetched, or validated, including index and gzip handling. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the context is strong enough to route an agent correctly.

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

Deploy Server