Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Semrush MCP

Semrush MCP

by mrkooblu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

semrush_url_adwords

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve paid keywords for a given URL to analyze competitor ad strategies and optimize your campaigns.

Instructions

Get paid keywords for a specific URL

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": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "semrush_url_adwords"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYes
databaseNous
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 and idempotentHint, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds no behavioral context beyond what's in the annotations, such as pagination or rate limits. It neither contradicts nor significantly supplements.

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, making it concise. However, it may be too minimal; additional context could be provided without becoming verbose.

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?

Given three parameters, zero schema coverage, and many sibling tools, the description is insufficient. It lacks return value details, parameter explanations, and selection criteria, making it incomplete for an agent to use confidently.

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 description coverage is 0%. The description fails to explain any parameter (url, database, limit) beyond implying url is the target. No format, defaults, or constraints are described, leaving the agent to guess.

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 'Get paid keywords for a specific URL', using a specific verb and resource. Among siblings, this tool is distinguished by targeting a URL rather than domain or subfolder, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like semrush_domain_paid_keywords or semrush_keyword_paid_results. The description only specifies the input is a URL, without any context for selection.

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