Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
flin-google-search-console-mcp

flin-google-search-console-mcp

by flin-agency
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

list_sites

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve Search Console properties for a Google account before choosing a site to analyze. Opens browser sign-in when needed and refreshes the local token without modifying properties.

Instructions

List properties available to the selected Google account before choosing a site to analyse.

Opens Google sign-in in the browser if needed and saves or refreshes the local token. Does not modify Search Console properties.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "list_sites"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accountNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.7
    • addedInput schema / properties / account
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Account"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, openWorld), and the description adds materially new behavior: it may open a browser sign-in flow and persist or refresh a local token. It also explicitly bounds the side effects by stating it does not modify Search Console properties, resolving the apparent tension between a token write and readOnlyHint=true.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and the sequencing constraint, followed by the side effect and the explicit non-effect. Nothing is redundant or padded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the auth side effect, the non-destructive scope, and when to call it. The only remaining gap is the meaning and accepted values of the optional `account` parameter.

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% for the single `account` parameter, so the description carries the burden of explaining it. It only implies that the account is a selector ("the selected Google account") and does not say what values are accepted, whether it is an email, an index, or what happens when it is omitted.

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 ("List properties available to the selected Google account") and implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings by positioning it as the step "before choosing a site to analyse", which the sibling tools (get_site_summary, query_performance, etc.) all require. It never names a sibling explicitly, so it falls short of full differentiation.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear sequencing guidance: run this before analysing a site, because it establishes which properties are available. It does not state any when-not-to-use condition or name the alternative tools, so there is no explicit alternative routing.

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