Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
GSC SEO MCP

GSC SEO MCP

by samalyxx
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

batch_inspect_urls

Inspect multiple URLs in Google Search Console sequentially to check indexing status and issues, while respecting API quota limits by keeping batches small.

Instructions

Inspect multiple URLs sequentially. Keep batches small to respect URL Inspection API quotas.

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": {
      "urls": "<urls>"
    },
    "name": "batch_inspect_urls"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteUrlNoGoogle Search Console property URL, e.g. sc-domain:example.com or https://www.example.com/.
urlsYes
languageCodeNoen-US

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description only mentions sequential processing and quota respect. It omits critical behavioral details such as error handling, partial failures, rate limits, and the structure of results, leaving the agent underinformed.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loads the purpose, and contains no wasted words, earning top marks.

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?

For a batch tool with 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain return values, error behavior, or how to interpret per-URL results, leaving 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.

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is low at 33% (only siteUrl described). The description does not add meaning to the parameters beyond the schema, failing to compensate for the undocumented urls and languageCode parameters.

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 'Inspect' and resource 'multiple URLs', distinguishing it from the sibling 'inspect_url' tool by emphasizing the batch and sequential nature.

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 offers a practical tip to keep batches small due to quotas, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like inspect_url, nor provides exclusions or prerequisites.

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