Website Auditor MCP

Start/stop monitoring

track_site

Monitor a website's AI visibility on a weekly schedule. Start or stop recurring tracking to watch changes over time and get alerts.

Instructions

Start (or stop) ongoing monitoring of a website's AI visibility on a schedule. Use this when someone wants to "monitor," "track," "watch," or "get alerted about" a site's AI visibility over time, rather than a one-off check. Establishes the history that get_changes reads from. 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".
`cadence`	No	Monitoring cadence (weekly).	weekly
`enabled`	No	Set false to stop monitoring.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`domain`	Yes
`cadence`	No
`created`	No	Present when starting: whether this call created a new tracking.
`message`	Yes
`removed`	No	Present when stopping.
`tracking`	Yes	True after a start/confirm; false after a stop.
`already_tracked`	No

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": {
+    "already_tracked": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "cadence": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "created": {
+      "description": "Present when starting: whether this call created a new tracking.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "removed": {
+      "description": "Present when stopping.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "tracking": {
+      "description": "True after a start/confirm; false after a stop.",
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "domain",
+    "tracking",
+    "message"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.6Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations only mark this as non-read-only and non-destructive; the description adds important behavioral context: monitoring continues on a schedule, it establishes history for get_changes, and a paid subscription is required. It also lays out the 7-day free trial terms, so an agent understands the commercial side effect before calling.

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 opening sentence names the action immediately, followed by precise usage guidance and prerequisite logic. Each sentence adds a distinct piece of information; no filler. The long subscription clause is justified because it determines whether the agent should call a different tool.

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?

Combined with the output schema and annotations, the description covers purpose, when to use, subscription gate, fallback tool, and relationship to get_changes. Nothing an agent needs to decide between this and siblings is missing.

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 the baseline is 3. The description doesn't add much parameter-level detail; it only hints at scheduling and stopping, which the schema's enabled/cadence docs already cover. No compensation needed, but no extra value either.

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?

States a specific action ('Start (or stop) ongoing monitoring') on a clear resource ('a website's AI visibility on a schedule'), and distinguishes itself from a one-off check. It also explicitly ties to sibling get_changes, making its role in the workflow unmistakable.

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?

Gives explicit trigger phrases ('monitor,' 'track,' 'watch,' 'get alerted about') and contrasts with 'rather than a one-off check.' It also provides a conditional alternative: if no Website Auditor subscription, call get_sample_audit first. This is strong, actionable routing.

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

Deploy Server