Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
seo-mcp

seo-mcp

by patchwindow
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

bing_sitemap_list

Retrieve all sitemaps submitted to Bing Webmaster Tools for a site, showing URL counts, indexed counts, errors, and last crawl time.

Instructions

List all sitemaps submitted to Bing Webmaster Tools for a site, including URL counts, indexed counts, errors, and last crawl time.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "bing_sitemap_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
site_urlNoYour site URL in Bing Webmaster Tools, e.g. 'https://example.com/'. Uses config default if omitted.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.1

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return contents (URL counts, indexed counts, errors, last crawl time) but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects. For a list tool, it's adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

The description is a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource, and efficiently lists included data without extraneous words.

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?

For a simple list tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains return values (URL counts, indexed counts, errors, last crawl time). No additional context needed for this low-complexity tool.

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 one parameter (site_url) with 100% schema description coverage. The tool description does not further elaborate on the parameter beyond what the schema provides. The schema already describes the parameter clearly, including the default behavior. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'list', the resource 'sitemaps submitted to Bing Webmaster Tools', and the specific data included (URL counts, indexed counts, errors, last crawl time). It distinguishes from sibling tools like gsc_sitemap_list by specifying Bing.

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?

The description implies usage when needing Bing sitemap info but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., gsc_sitemap_list). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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