Website Auditor MCP

Prioritized fixes

get_recommendations

Read-only

Get prioritized, ranked fixes to improve a domain's AI visibility and audit scores. Use after an audit to identify what to change, with expected impact for each action.

Instructions

Get specific, prioritized fixes to raise a website's AI visibility and audit scores. Use this when someone asks "how do I fix this," "what should I change," "how do I improve my AI visibility," or after an audit surfaces issues. Returns ranked actions with expected impact. Requires a Website Auditor subscription ($10/month; eligible new customers get a 7-day free trial — payment method required, no charge until the trial ends) — if the user doesn't have one, call get_sample_audit first to show them the exact output format, free and with no API key.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domain`	Yes	The website domain, e.g. "example.com".

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`recommendations`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.0.23Sep 9, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "recommendations": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": true,
+        "properties": {
+          "action": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "effort": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "expected_impact": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "why": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "recommendations"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.6Jul 29, 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/destructive annotations, the description discloses the Website Auditor subscription requirement with trial terms, states the return shape as 'ranked actions with expected impact,' and prescribes the get_sample_audit fallback. No contradiction: readOnlyHint=true aligns with a read operation.

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?

Purpose and usage triggers are front-loaded, followed by return shape and entitlement details in order of importance. The subscription/trial sentence is dense but each clause earns its place by telling the agent whether to call the tool or divert to get_sample_audit; slightly verbose but not bloated.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 1-parameter tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description covers the operational essentials: usage triggers, return content, entitlement gating, and fallback routing. The only ambiguity is whether a prior run_audit is a prerequisite or whether the tool works standalone from the trigger phrases alone.

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 coverage is 100% for the single 'domain' parameter, so the schema already documents its meaning and format. The description adds no parameter-level detail, but none is needed for a self-explanatory domain string; baseline 3 applies.

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: 'Get specific, prioritized fixes to raise a website's AI visibility and audit scores.' The title 'Prioritized fixes' and the phrase 'ranked actions with expected impact' clearly distinguish it from siblings like run_audit, get_changes, and get_gtm_plan.

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?

Explicit usage triggers are listed ('how do I fix this,' 'what should I change,' 'how do I improve my AI visibility,' or after an audit surfaces issues), and the subscription requirement routes to the correct alternative: 'if the user doesn't have one, call get_sample_audit first.' This gives the agent both when-to-use and when-to-fallback guidance.

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

Deploy Server