Website Auditor MCP

Stop monitoring

untrack_site

Destructive

Stop monitoring a website's AI visibility and free up a monitoring slot. Removes its scheduled tracking enrollment while keeping past audits.

Instructions

Stop ongoing monitoring of a website's AI visibility. Use this when someone wants to "stop tracking," "unmonitor," "stop watching," or "remove" a site from scheduled monitoring, or to free up a monitoring slot. Removing a tracked site deletes its monitoring enrollment (its past audits are kept); calling it for a site that isn't tracked changes nothing. Returns how many monitoring slots are now free. 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
`used`	No
`limit`	No
`domain`	Yes
`message`	Yes
`removed`	Yes
`tracking`	Yes
`remaining`	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": {
+    "domain": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "limit": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "message": {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "remaining": {
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "removed": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "tracking": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "used": {
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "domain",
+    "tracking",
+    "removed",
+    "message"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.6Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description goes well beyond them: it discloses that past audits are retained, that calling it on an untracked site is a no-op, that it returns the number of free slots, and that a paid subscription is required. That is exactly the destructive/authorization/return context annotations alone cannot carry.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and use cases, then consequences, then return value, then the subscription prerequisite. Dense and mostly waste-free; the pricing/trial sentence is long but serves a real routing decision (whether to redirect to get_sample_audit).

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?

With an output schema present, return values need no exposition, yet the free-slot count is still surfaced. Prerequisites, idempotency, and data-retention behavior are all covered, leaving no gap an agent would need to guess at.

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% and the single 'domain' parameter is fully documented there, so the description need not re-explain it. It reinforces that the target is a website/domain but adds no format or validation detail beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

States a precise verb+resource+scope: 'Stop ongoing monitoring of a website's AI visibility.' It is unambiguously the inverse of the sibling track_site, and an agent can pick between them without opening either schema.

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 ('stop tracking,' 'unmonitor,' 'stop watching,' 'remove'), the slot-freeing motivation, and a routing rule for the non-subscriber case: call get_sample_audit first. When-to-use and when-to-do-something-else are both spelled out.

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

Deploy Server