Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Search Console by Get MCP Ads

Google Search Console by Get MCP Ads

by get-mcp-ads
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

gsc health check

gsc_health_check
Read-onlyIdempotent

Verify Google Search Console read-only authentication, visible properties, default site, and permission levels without exposing tokens.

Instructions

Verify Google Search Console read-only authentication, visible properties, configured default site, and permission levels without exposing tokens.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteUrlNoSearch Console property URL, e.g. https://example.com/ or sc-domain:example.com. Uses GSC_SITE_URL when omitted.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYesOriginal tool result: parsed JSON when the text is JSON, otherwise the text or multiple MCP content blocks. Provider fields depend on the selected query.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv2.1.1
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
    • changedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "additionalProperties": true,
-    "properties": {},
-    "type": "object"
-  },
-  {
-    "items": {},
-    "type": "array"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "string"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "number"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "boolean"
-  },
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "additionalProperties": {},
+    "properties": {},
+    "type": "object"
+  },
+  {
+    "items": {},
+    "type": "array"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "string"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "boolean"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv2.0.1

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description still adds real value by disclosing that tokens are never exposed in output, which is a security-relevant behavior an agent would otherwise have to discover empirically.

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?

A single dense sentence with no filler; the action verb leads and the enumerated checks follow immediately. Nothing needs trimming.

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 details needn't be spelled out, and the single parameter is fully documented. The one remaining gap is the operational framing — when in a workflow an agent should call this and how to react to a failed check.

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

Parameters3/5

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

With a single optional parameter at 100% schema coverage, the schema fully documents siteUrl and its GSC_SITE_URL fallback. The description only obliquely gestures at this via 'configured default site', adding little semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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?

Specific verb (verify) plus a concrete list of resources checked: read-only authentication, visible properties, default site, permission levels. It is distinguishable from data-querying siblings like gsc_query_search_analytics or gsc_list_sites, though it never names a sibling to draw the contrast explicitly.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is only implied by the name and the word 'Verify' — an agent can infer this is a diagnostic/setup tool, but the description never says to run it before other calls, what to do on failure, or when gsc_list_sites would be the better 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