Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MCP Hub

MCP Hub

by airano-ir
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

Search Console: Search analytics

google_search_console_search_analytics
Read-only

Query Search Console analytics by property, date range, and dimensions to retrieve clicks, impressions, CTR, and position for SEO reporting.

Instructions

[UNIFIED] Query Search Analytics data for a property with bounded dimensions and date ranges. Returns rows with clicks, impressions, CTR, and position broken down by the specified dimensions. Date range is limited to 548 days (~18 months). Maximum 25,000 rows per request.

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": "<site>",
      "site_url": "<site_url>",
      "start_date": "<start_date>",
      "end_date": "<end_date>"
    },
    "name": "google_search_console_search_analytics"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYes
end_dateYes
site_urlYes
start_rowNo
data_stateNofinal
dimensionsNo
rows_limitNo
start_dateYes
type_filterNoweb

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv3.14.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add real operational context beyond that: a 548-day (~18 month) cap on the date range and a 25,000-row ceiling per request, both of which affect how an agent chunks queries. It says nothing about pagination via start_row or quota/rate behavior, so it stops short of full transparency.

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?

Three tight sentences with the core capability front-loaded and the hard limits following. Nothing is padded, though the bracketed "[UNIFIED]" tag adds little for a caller and the limits could be grouped more tightly.

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

Completeness2/5

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

For a 9-parameter query tool with no output schema and zero schema description coverage, the description is thin. It compensates partially by enumerating the returned metric columns and the two hard caps, but leaves the site/site_url duplication, dimension format, and pagination semantics entirely undocumented.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across 9 parameters, so the description carries the burden and largely fails. It hints at dimensions, date range, and a row limit, but never explains the two required and apparently overlapping fields site vs site_url, nor start_row, data_state, or type_filter — all of which an agent must guess at.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Query Search Analytics data for a property") and names the returned metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, position). It is clearly distinct from the listed siblings (inspect_url, list_properties, list_sitemaps), though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternative is named. The reader must infer that this is the reporting tool while inspect_url and list_properties serve other purposes; nothing in the text routes that choice.

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