Skip to main content
Glama
guifreballester-seranking

SE Ranking SEO Data API MCP Server

by guifreballester-seranking
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

AIO Keywords by Target

domainAioKeywordsByTarget

Get AI Overview keywords for any domain, subdomain, or URL. Use this tool to identify terms that trigger AI-generated search results and analyze their rankings, volume, and visibility.

Instructions

Fetch AI Overviews domain keywords by target (v1/domain/aio/keywords-by-target)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoThe field to sort the results by. Available values: volume, type, snippet_length.volume
limitNoThe maximum number of keywords to return per page.
scopeNoThe scope of the analysis. Can be base_domain (domain and all subdomains), domain (specific host), or url (exact URL).base_domain
offsetNoThe starting position for paginated results.
sourceYesThe alpha-2 country code for the regional database. Example: us
targetYesThe domain, subdomain, or URL to analyze. Example: seranking.com
sort_orderNoThe order for sorting. Available values: asc, desc.desc
filter[cpc][to]NoSpecifies the maximum Cost Per Click (CPC) value for keywords.
filter[intents]NoA comma-separated list of search intent codes to filter keywords.
filter[cpc][from]NoSpecifies the minimum Cost Per Click (CPC) value for keywords.
filter[volume][to]NoSpecifies the maximum monthly search volume for keywords to be included.
filter[traffic][to]NoSpecifies the maximum estimated monthly traffic for keywords.
filter[position][to]NoSpecifies the maximum ranking position for keywords.
filter[volume][from]NoSpecifies the minimum monthly search volume for keywords to be included.
filter[traffic][from]NoSpecifies the minimum estimated monthly traffic for keywords.
filter[difficulty][to]NoSpecifies the maximum keyword difficulty score for keywords to be included.
filter[position][from]NoSpecifies the minimum ranking position for keywords.
filter[competition][to]NoSpecifies the maximum competition score for keywords.
filter[difficulty][from]NoSpecifies the minimum keyword difficulty score (typically 0-100) for keywords to be included.
filter[competition][from]NoSpecifies the minimum competition score (typically 0-1 or 0-100, depending on the metric scale) for keywords.
filter[keyword_count][to]NoSpecifies the maximum number of words in a keyword phrase.
filter[keyword_count][from]NoSpecifies the minimum number of words in a keyword phrase.
filter[characters_count][to]NoSpecifies the maximum character length for keyword phrases.
filter[characters_count][from]NoSpecifies the minimum character length for keyword phrases.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'Fetch', which implies read-only behavior. It does not mention pagination, sorting defaults, filtering semantics, output structure, rate limits, or any operational caveats.

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

Conciseness3/5

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

The description is a single sentence with no filler words, so it is concise. However, for a 24-parameter API with many sibling tools, it is under-specified rather than helpfully structured; the parenthetical endpoint is useful but the description barely goes beyond the tool name.

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?

The schema is rich, but there are no annotations and no output schema, so the description must provide more context. It fails to explain what the results look like, how filters interact, or when this target-based endpoint should be preferred over the many sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer too much.

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?

The input schema already documents all 24 parameters with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the 'target' hint in the endpoint, and does not clarify the relationship between the required source and target parameters.

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 AI Overviews domain keywords by target', and includes the endpoint for reference. It distinguishes itself from brand-based sibling tools via the 'by target' phrasing, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 given on when to use this tool versus siblings like domainAioKeywordsByBrand, domainAioOverview, or domainKeywords. There are no conditions, exclusions, or hints about which scenario calls for this specific endpoint.

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