Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Trends MCP

Google Trends MCP

by den-indance
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

get_interest_by_region

Retrieve regional search interest for a keyword, showing geographic distribution of popularity over a specified timeframe.

Instructions

Get search interest by region/country for a keyword

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": {
      "keyword": "<keyword>"
    },
    "name": "get_interest_by_region"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
geoNo
keywordYes
timeframeNotoday 12-m

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.5/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention any behavioral traits such as data freshness, rate limits, authentication, or what happens with default parameters.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is too short, lacking necessary details about parameters and behavior. It is under-specified rather than genuinely concise, sacrificing completeness for brevity.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It omits parameter explanations, return format, and usage notes, leaving the agent under-informed.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description provides no explanation of the parameters (geo, timeframe) beyond what is in the schema. The agent receives no additional semantic meaning for correct usage.

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 clearly states the verb 'Get', the resource 'search interest', and the qualifiers 'by region/country' and 'for a keyword', making the purpose specific and distinguishable from sibling tools like compare_keywords.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., compare_keywords, get_related_queries). The description lacks context about appropriate use cases or constraints.

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