semrush-mcp

semrush_traffic_summary

Get traffic summary data for domains to analyze key metrics like visits, bounce rate, and engagement duration. Supports multiple domains and country filtering.

Instructions

Get traffic summary data for domains (requires .Trends API access)

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": {
      "domains": "<domains>"
    },
    "name": "semrush_traffic_summary"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`domains`	Yes	Array of domains to analyze traffic for
`country`	No	Country code (e.g., "us", "uk", "ca", etc.)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.5Jun 3, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic function and a prerequisite, omitting behavioral details like rate limits, data freshness, response structure, or side effects.

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?

Extremely concise single sentence that includes purpose and a prerequisite. No wasted words, but could be slightly more structured for clearer parsing.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps: no mention of return format, pagination, or limitations. With no annotations, more context would be beneficial.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is in the schema, so baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states verb 'Get' and resource 'traffic summary data for domains'. Differentiates from siblings like semrush_traffic_sources and semrush_domain_overview by specifying 'traffic summary' and requiring '.Trends API access', but does not explicitly contrast with those tools.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Only mentions a requirement ('.Trends API access'), but no context on appropriate scenarios or exclusion criteria.

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