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

mcp-server-bwt

by agalliani
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

get_deep_link_blocks

Retrieve deep link blocks for a given site URL to inspect which deep links are blocked.

Instructions

Get deep link blocks for a site.

Args: site_url: The URL of the site

Returns: List[DeepLinkBlock]: List of deep link blocks

Raises: BingWebmasterError: If blocks 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_blocks"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_urlYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description provides only an implicit read-only operation and a generic Raises clause. It does not mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or what differentiates this retrieval call behaviorally from get_deep_link.

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, starts with the core action, and separates Args, Returns, and Raises cleanly. It has no filler or redundant sentences, though the parameter explanation is minimally informative.

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 getter with an output schema, the description is mostly sufficient to make the call, but it does not clarify what deep link blocks are or how they differ from related tools such as add_page_preview/get_deep_link, leaving the agent reliant on the schema and naming.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the burden falls entirely on the description, but 'site_url: The URL of the site' is near-tautological and adds little beyond the parameter name. It does not specify URL format, requiredness nuance, or any constraints.

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 action and resource: 'Get deep link blocks for a site.' This distinguishes the verb and scope, though it does not explain what a deep link block is or how it differs from the sibling get_deep_link tool.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_deep_link or remove_deep_link_block. An agent would have no information about trade-offs or conditions favoring this call.

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