Skip to main content
Glama
sparrow84001

SEO, AEO, GEO & Digital Marketing Audit + Safe Fix MCP Server

by sparrow84001
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

seo_discover_project

Detect web frameworks, routing, sitemap and robots configurations from a local project path to generate a page inventory for SEO audits.

Instructions

Discovers website architecture, detected web frameworks (Laravel Blade, Next.js App/Pages Router, Nuxt, Astro, PHP, static HTML), routing structure, existing sitemap/robots configurations, and page inventory.

USAGE GUIDELINES:

  • Use when starting an audit of a local codebase to detect framework patterns and file routes.

  • Do NOT use for remote websites or live URLs; use 'seo_crawl_and_extract' or 'seo_audit_sitemap_multipage' instead.

BEHAVIORAL TRANSPARENCY:

  • Safe, read-only local filesystem scan. Makes no network calls and modifies no files.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
projectPathNoAbsolute or relative directory path to the website root (e.g., "." or "/path/to/project"). Defaults to current directory..

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.1.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / projectPath / default
      Added value: +"."
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectPath / description
      Previous value: -"Absolute or relative path to project root directory."New value: +"Absolute or relative directory path to the website root (e.g., \".\" or \"/path/to/project\"). Defaults to current directory."
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "projectPath"
-]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description openly states that the tool is safe, read-only, makes no network calls, and modifies no files. This is exactly the kind of behavioral disclosure needed when no annotations are provided.

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 two concise sentences, with usage and behavior clearly separated into distinct sections. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the large set of sibling tools, this description effectively differentiates itself by specifying the local-scope use case and explicitly naming alternatives for remote audits. It provides enough context for an agent to select it correctly.

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?

The single parameter 'projectPath' is fully described in the schema with a clear definition, example values, and a default. While the tool description itself adds no extra detail, the schema coverage is complete and unambiguous, so only a minor deduction is warranted.

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 tool's function: discovering website architecture, frameworks, routing, sitemap/robots, and page inventory. The verb 'discovers' is specific and the resource (website architecture) is well-defined.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly states when to use ('when starting an audit of a local codebase') and when not to use (remote websites or live URLs), with clear alternative tool names provided. This leaves no ambiguity about the intended use case.

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