Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-server-bwt

mcp-server-bwt

by agalliani
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_deep_link_algo_urls

Retrieve algorithmically generated deep link URLs for a specified site to analyze Bing indexing patterns and resolve URL structure issues.

Instructions

Get algo URLs with deep links. (Deprecated)

Args: site_url: The URL of the site

Returns: List[DeepLinkAlgoUrl]: List of algo URLs with deep links

Raises: BingWebmasterError: If algo URLs cannot be retrieved

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "site_url": "<site_url>"
    },
    "name": "get_deep_link_algo_urls"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_urlYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose deprecation and the possible exception type (BingWebmasterError), but it doesn't mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only.

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 compact and clearly structured with Args, Returns, and Raises sections. The deprecation note is placed up front, and there is no redundant filler.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a one-parameter deprecation tool, the definition is mostly complete, especially with the output schema present. However, it fails to explain what "algo URLs" are or direct the user to a non-deprecated alternative, which an agent would need for real-world invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must add meaning for the parameter. It only restates "site_url: The URL of the site," which adds little beyond the parameter name and leaves open questions about required format or preconditions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb+resource: "Get algo URLs with deep links." It is reasonably specific and the Args/Returns block clarifies the input and output, though it doesn't contrast itself with sibling tools like get_deep_link.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The tool is marked "Deprecated," but no replacement tool is named, so the agent is left without a recommended migration path.

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