geo-check-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_ai_crawlersA | List the AI / search crawler user-agents this server checks, with operator and purpose. |
| check_robotsA | Evaluate robots.txt text (no network) for AI crawlers. Args: robots_txt: full robots.txt content. path: URL path to test, e.g. "/" or "/blog/post". user_agents: crawler tokens to test; defaults to the built-in AI crawler list. |
| check_siteA | Run the full GEO technical check on a public website (robots.txt AI-crawler access, homepage JSON-LD types, /llms.txt, sitemap, title/description/canonical/h1). Makes about 4 polite requests (1 s apart, declared User-Agent, obeys robots.txt). Args: url: site URL, e.g. https://example.com format: "json" (structured report) or "markdown" (adds a human-readable report). |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
list_ai_crawlers (reference data), check_robots (offline robots.txt evaluation) and check_site (network-based full GEO audit) each have a clearly stated purpose. The only mild overlap is that check_site also covers robots.txt AI-crawler access, so an agent could conceivably pick check_site when it only wanted the robots check, but the offline/online distinction in the descriptions resolves this.
All three names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: list_ai_crawlers, check_robots, check_site. The check_ prefix groups the two evaluation tools logically and list_ signals the reference-data tool.
Three tools is on the small side, but the server's scope (GEO/technical crawlability checks) is narrow and each tool earns its place: one reference list, one offline evaluator, one full site audit. Slightly thin but well scoped rather than padded.
The surface covers the core GEO workflow: discovering which crawlers matter, testing robots.txt offline, and running a combined audit of robots.txt, JSON-LD, /llms.txt, sitemap and head tags. Minor gaps exist — no standalone llms.txt or JSON-LD/sitemap check, and no offline HTML inspection — but these are reachable through check_site.