Skip to main content
Glama
localseodata

Local SEO Data

Official

geogrid_status

Read-only

Poll a geogrid_scan job_id to check if a long-running local ranking grid scan is pending, running, complete, or failed, and retrieve the full grid once ready.

Instructions

Collects the grid from a geogrid_scan that returned a job_id instead of a result. FREE -- poll as often as you need.

Returns status "pending" or "running" while the grid is being searched, "complete" with the full grid once done, and "failed" with an error if the scan died (it is refunded). Most scans finish inside geogrid_scan itself and never need this; a scan that runs long is the one that does.

Points that could not be checked have status "error" in grid_points, are counted in failed_points, and are refunded.

READING THE GRID: grid is a 2D array where 0 means the business was not found at that point, not that it ranked zero. average_rank and found_in count only the points where it WAS found, so a strong average_rank across a low found_in means the business ranks well in a small area and is invisible outside it -- which is the finding a geogrid exists to produce.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
job_idYesThe job_id geogrid_scan returned instead of a grid.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
atrpNo
gridNo
solvNo
zoomNo
errorNo
totalNo
cachedNo
centerNo
job_idYes
statusYes
keywordNo
warningNo
found_inNo
place_idNo
progressNo
grid_sizeNo
zoom_modeNo
grid_pointsNo
average_rankNo
completed_atNo
radius_milesNo
total_pointsNo
business_nameNo
failed_pointsNo
credits_refundedNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.1.0

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already mark it read-only, open-world, and non-destructive, but the description adds substantial context: FREE unlimited polling, the full pending/running/complete/failed lifecycle, refunds on failure, and per-point error/refund semantics. No annotation contradiction.

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?

Front-loads the core trigger in the first sentence, then moves through statuses, error/refund handling, and grid-reading notes in short labeled chunks. The length is justified by async polling and interpretation guidance, with no 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?

Even with an output schema present, the description supplies interpretive rules the schema cannot convey: 0 means not found, and average_rank/found_in count only found points. Combined with annotations and complete parameter coverage, nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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?

There is only one parameter, and schema coverage is 100% with a description that already explains job_id as the value returned by geogrid_scan. The description repeats that meaning but does not materially extend it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: collect the grid from a geogrid_scan job that returned a job_id. It also names the exact sibling scenario that triggers it, so an agent can distinguish it from geogrid_scan and unrelated status tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says to use it only when geogrid_scan returned a job_id instead of a result, notes that most scans never need this tool, and encourages polling because it is free. That covers both when to use it and when not to.

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