Skip to main content
Glama
Suganthan-Mohanadasan

Google Search Console MCP Server

by Suganthan-Mohanadasan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

image_keyword_trends

Compare image-search query performance across two equal periods. See impressions and position changes to spot queries that gained or lost visibility in Google Images.

Instructions

Period-over-period trend for image-search queries. Two equal-length windows joined on query, with impressions and position deltas. Negative position delta means the query improved its average rank. IMPORTANT: Base your analysis ONLY on the data returned. Report exact numbers from the results. Do not speculate about causes (e.g. algorithm updates, competitor actions) unless the data explicitly supports it. If the data does not contain enough information to answer a question, say so clearly rather than guessing. PRESENTATION: Always present these results as a rich, interactive visualization using artifacts. Use summary cards for key metrics, colour-coded indicators for severity or change direction (green for positive, red for negative), bar charts or sparklines for comparisons, and tabbed sections to organise different categories of results. Make the output visually scannable and dashboard-like rather than plain text or raw tables. POSITION: position is an impression-weighted average over real impressions, blended across queries, devices and countries. It is not a rank-tracker rank. Deep positions are only recorded when a user actually reaches that part of the results, so values beyond page one rest on sparse data. Treat absolute positions as directional and prefer position deltas between periods when judging change.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
daysNoLength in days of each comparison window (current + prior)
order_byNoSort fieldimpressions_delta
site_urlNoOverride the configured property (e.g. sc-domain:example.com or https://www.example.com/)
row_limitNoMaximum rows to return
min_combined_impressionsNoMinimum combined impressions across both windows

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv2.5.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / site_url
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Override the configured property (e.g. sc-domain:example.com or https://www.example.com/)",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Addedv2.4.0

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that position is an impression-weighted average, not a rank-tracker rank, that deep positions rest on sparse data, and that absolute positions should be treated as directional. It also mandates data-only analysis and dashboard-style presentation, going well beyond a generic 'returns trends' statement.

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?

The description is long but well structured with labeled sections (IMPORTANT, PRESENTATION, POSITION) and a front-loaded purpose statement. Every section earns its place by constraining how results should be interpreted and presented, though it could be trimmed slightly without losing value.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description is remarkably complete. It defines metric semantics, warns about data sparsity, instructs the agent to avoid speculation, and specifies the required presentation format. An agent has enough context to call the tool, interpret the results, and produce the expected artifact.

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 adds useful context around windows and position-delta meaning, but it does not materially explain the individual parameters (days, order_by, site_url, row_limit, min_combined_impressions) beyond what the schema already provides.

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-resource pair: 'Period-over-period trend for image-search queries.' It explains the comparison mechanics (two equal-length windows joined on query with impressions and position deltas), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like image_keyword_overview or image_search_quick_wins.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The first sentence implies the use case of comparing two time periods for image-search query trends, but no explicit alternatives are named and there is no when-not-to-use guidance. The extensive IMPORTANT/POSITION sections concern interpretation and presentation, not tool selection.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools