Skip to main content
Glama
jain-eshan

Google Trends MCP

by jain-eshan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

related_queries

Discover top and rising related search queries for any keyword, showing relative interest and growth percentages to identify emerging search trends.

Instructions

Top and rising related search queries for a single keyword.

Args: keyword: a single search term. timeframe: pytrends timeframe string, e.g. "today 12-m". geo: ISO country code (e.g. "US", "IN"), or "" for worldwide (default). response_format: "concise" (default) returns only the top 10 of each list, sorted by "value" descending, rounded to whole numbers. "full" returns every row Google Trends provides (often 25), unrounded.

Returns: A dict with two keys, each containing a list of query records: - "top": most-searched related queries. Each record has "query" and "value" (0-100 relative interest on Google Trends scale). - "rising": fastest-growing related queries. Each record has "query" and "value" (percent increase in search interest). IMPORTANT: a value of 5000% is Google's "Breakout" marker, indicating explosive new growth from near-zero baseline, NOT a literal 5000% increase. This is Google's way of saying the data cannot be assigned a meaningful numeric value.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
geoNo
keywordYes
timeframeNotoday 12-m
response_formatNoconcise

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / geo / default
      Previous value: -"IN"New value: +""
    • addedInput schema / properties / response_format
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "concise",
+  "title": "Response Format",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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. It does well by explaining the response_format behavior (concise vs full), the sorting and rounding behavior, and the critical Breakout marker semantics. It doesn't mention rate limits or auth, but for a read-only query tool, the behavioral details provided are substantial.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with clear sections for args and returns. It is somewhat verbose but every sentence earns its place, especially the Breakout marker explanation. The front-loaded purpose statement is clear, and the formatting is scannable.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description does a strong job of explaining the return structure and key value semantics. It covers the main parameters and the critical edge case (Breakout). Minor gaps include lack of error handling or pagination details, but for a single-keyword query tool, the description is largely complete.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains keyword, timeframe, geo, and response_format with examples and defaults. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the response_format values and the geo default. It doesn't detail every nuance of timeframe strings, but provides a representative example.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool returns 'Top and rising related search queries for a single keyword,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes itself from siblings like related_topics by focusing on queries rather than topics, and the scope is unambiguous.

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?

The description provides clear context on when to use the tool: for a single keyword's related search queries. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list and the focused scope imply usage. The 'IMPORTANT' note about the 5000% Breakout marker adds critical usage guidance for interpreting results.

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