Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Semrush MCP

Semrush MCP

by mrkooblu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

semrush_keyword_ads_history

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve domains that have bid on a keyword over the past 12 months for competitive analysis.

Instructions

Get domains that bid on a keyword in the last 12 months (100 API units per line)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "keyword": "<keyword>",
      "database": "<database>"
    },
    "name": "semrush_keyword_ads_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keywordYes
databaseYes
limitNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. The description adds the cost of 100 API units per line, which is useful behavioral info beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose other traits like rate limits or pagination.

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 a single short sentence that includes the core action and cost. It is efficient with no wasted words, though it could benefit from slight restructuring to separate the action from cost.

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 tool has 3 parameters (2 required) and no output schema. The description does not explain expected return format, pagination, or how to interpret the results. For a data-retrieval tool, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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

Parameters1/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, meaning no parameter descriptions in the schema. The description does not explain the meaning or format of keyword, database, or limit, failing to add any semantic value beyond the schema's type constraints.

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 domains that bid on a keyword within the last 12 months, using a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'domains that bid on a keyword'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like semrush_keyword_paid_results by specifying historical data.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or suggest other tools for related queries, leaving the agent without clear decision criteria.

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