Skip to main content
Glama
guifreballester-seranking

SE Ranking SEO Data API MCP Server

by guifreballester-seranking
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Domain Ads by Keyword

domainAdsByKeyword

Retrieve the domains running paid ads for a specific keyword in a selected country. Use this to identify ad competitors and analyze paid search landscape.

Instructions

Fetch domain ads by keyword (v1/domain/ads)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
toNoThe ending year and month for the data retrieval period, formatted as “YYYY-MM”.
fromNoThe starting year and month for the data retrieval period, formatted as “YYYY-MM” (e.g., “2017-01”).
pageNoFor paginated results, specifies the page number of domains advertising on this keyword to retrieve.
limitNoThe maximum number of domains (advertising on the keyword) to return per page.
sourceYesAlpha-2 country code of the regional keyword database.
keywordYesThe specific keyword for which to retrieve paid ad data.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does not mention pagination (page/limit), date-range constraints (from/to), the required country source, or the shape of the returned data; it only says 'fetch'.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The endpoint parenthetical adds a small amount of useful context without bloating the text.

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 tool with six parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, this description is too minimal to fully orient an agent. It lacks usage context, behavioral details, and any indication of what a result contains, though the schema does document parameters.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, but it does not need to, as each property already has a descriptive text.

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?

The description states a clear action ('Fetch'), resource ('domain ads'), and selection criterion ('by keyword'), plus the endpoint. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling domainAdsByDomain, though the keyword qualifier makes the purpose understandable.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as domainAdsByDomain or domainKeywords. The description only states the operation, leaving the agent to infer appropriate use.

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