Google Search Console by Get MCP Ads

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

gsc indexation watchlist

gsc_indexation_watchlist

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect up to 10 critical URLs in a read-only watchlist and return alert, review, or OK assessments to catch indexation issues without storing state.

Instructions

Read-only URL Inspection watchlist for critical URLs. Inspects up to 10 URLs and returns alert/review/ok assessments without storing state.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`urls`	Yes	Watchlist entries. Maximum 10 per call to protect URL Inspection quota.
`siteUrl`	No	Search Console property URL, e.g. https://example.com/ or sc-domain:example.com. Uses GSC_SITE_URL when omitted.
`languageCode`	No	Optional IETF language tag, e.g. en-US or fr-FR.
`continueOnError`	No	Continue with other URLs when one inspection fails, returning individual failures.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes	Original 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.

Changed3 schema fields changedv2.1.1Oct 30, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
removedInput schema / properties / urls / items / 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"
+  }
+]

First observedv2.0.1Sep 23, 2026

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, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context: statelessness ("without storing state") and the triage output shape (alert/review/ok), which tells the agent what to expect from a monitoring call. The 10-URL cap is repeated from the schema rather than added.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with read-only scope and the batch limit, with nothing redundant. Every clause carries information.

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 not be explained, and annotations cover safety. What is missing is the core mechanic: that assessments are produced by comparing entries against expectedVerdict/expectedCanonical/expectedCoverageState. Useful but slightly incomplete for an expectation-checking tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents urls, siteUrl fallback to GSC_SITE_URL, languageCode, and continueOnError. The description adds no meaning beyond it, so the baseline 3 applies; notably it never mentions the expectedVerdict/expectedCanonical comparison fields that drive the assessment.

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 (inspects) and resource (URL Inspection watchlist of critical URLs) and names the output vocabulary (alert/review/ok assessments). It does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings like gsc_inspect_url or gsc_bulk_inspect_urls, so the agent must infer that this is the expectation-driven variant.

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?

"For critical URLs" and "without storing state" imply when to reach for it, but there is no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to gsc_inspect_url / gsc_bulk_inspect_urls for other cases. The agent is left to infer the boundary between this and the bulk inspection siblings.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.