Sam GSC MCP

batch_url_inspection

Read-onlyIdempotent

Inspect multiple Google Search Console URLs concurrently to get each URL's index verdict, coverage status, last crawl date, and rich results.

Instructions

Inspect several URLs at once (concurrently). Returns index verdict, coverage, last crawl and rich results per URL.

Args: site_url: Exact property (defaults to GSC_SITE_URL) urls: URLs, one per line or a JSON array (default max 10, see GSC_MAX_BATCH_URLS)

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "batch_url_inspection"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`urls`	No
`site_url`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 24, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to repeat the safety profile. It adds meaningful behavior by disclosing concurrent inspection, per-URL return fields, batch-size defaults, and the environment variable controlling the limit.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and return details, then gives a compact Args section. Every sentence provides useful information about behavior, parameters, or limits, with no repetition or filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a two-parameter batch inspection tool with an output schema and full annotations, the description is complete. It covers purpose, concurrency, return fields, both parameters, defaults, and batch-size limits.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It documents both parameters well: site_url is the exact property and defaults to GSC_SITE_URL; urls may be one per line or a JSON array, with a default max batch size controlled by GSC_MAX_BATCH_URLS.

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 states a specific action and resource: inspecting several URLs at once, concurrently. It also distinguishes the batch behavior from single-URL inspection siblings by explicitly saying 'several URLs at once' and describing per-URL results.

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 makes the batch context clear and gives useful limits such as the default max of 10 and the GSC_MAX_BATCH_URLS setting. It does not explicitly name alternatives like inspect_url_enhanced or state when not to use this tool, but the batch scope is clear enough for selection.

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