Google Search Console MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Explain a change in traffic

explain_change

Read-only

Explain why traffic rose or fell between two equal periods: break the change down by page, query, country, device, and search appearance, then show the biggest drivers and nearby Google updates.

Instructions

Answer "why did traffic go up or down?" between two periods of equal length. Splits the change by page, query, country, device and search appearance and says which slices account for most of it; separates clicks lost to fewer impressions from clicks lost to a lower CTR; and lists Google updates that ran in or near the periods. Defaults compare the last 28 days of final data with the 28 before.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`top`	No	Movers to list per breakdown and direction.
`metric`	No	The metric whose change to explain.	clicks
`filters`	No	Explain the change within this slice only; combined with AND.
`site_url`	Yes	The property, as listed by list_sites: 'sc-domain:example.com' for a domain property or 'https://www.example.com/' for a URL-prefix property. A bare domain such as 'example.com', or any URL on the site, is resolved to the property that contains it.
`breakdowns`	No	Dimensions to split the change by. Omit for every one the search type has: page, query, country, device and searchAppearance.
`data_state`	No	Defaults to 'final': fresh, still-changing data in the current period would read as a decline against a complete baseline.	final
`current_end`	No	Last day of the period to analyze. Defaults to 3 days ago, the last day that is usually final.
`fetch_limit`	No	Top rows fetched per period and breakdown.
`search_type`	No		web
`previous_end`	No	Last day of the baseline; same length as current.
`current_start`	No	First day of the period to analyze, YYYY-MM-DD (Pacific Time).
`previous_start`	No	First day of the baseline. Defaults to the period just before.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`notes`	No
`metric`	Yes
`totals`	Yes
`effects`	No
`summary`	Yes	The findings in plain sentences.
`requests`	Yes	The exact request bodies sent to Google.
`site_url`	Yes
`breakdowns`	Yes
`data_state`	Yes
`search_type`	Yes
`current_period`	Yes
`google_updates`	Yes	Google updates and incidents in or near the periods. Timing alone does not show that one caused the change.
`previous_period`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.0Oct 15, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds real behavioral context beyond that: the decomposition it performs (impressions loss vs CTR loss, update overlay) and the default comparison window of the last 28 days of final data versus the prior 28.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the question the tool answers, then the mechanics, then the default. Dense but free of filler; appropriate weight for a 12-parameter tool.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers purpose, decomposition, and defaults. It is thin only on practical constraints an agent might want, such as cost/rate behavior implied by fetch_limit up to 25000 and the default search_type.

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 already 92%, which sets a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning on top by spelling out the default period pairing and the final-data window that governs current_end/previous_end, and by clarifying that the split covers page, query, country, device and search appearance.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description gives a concrete verb and resource — explaining why traffic moved between two equal-length periods — and enumerates the concrete outputs (per-dimension splits, impressions-vs-CTR decomposition, Google updates). It never names or contrasts against the sibling compare_periods, so an agent must infer the boundary between 'explain the change' and 'compare periods'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

Usage is strongly implied by the framing question ('why did traffic go up or down?') and the default window is stated, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no named alternative among the many query_* and compare_periods siblings.

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