Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Google Search Console MCP

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Stop tracking a sitemap

delete_sitemap
Destructive

Stop tracking a sitemap on a Google Search Console property, removing its submission history and per-sitemap coverage without deindexing URLs or deleting the file.

Instructions

Stop tracking a sitemap on a property. It does not deindex the URLs the sitemap listed, and it does not delete the file. What it does lose is the submission history and per-sitemap coverage for it. Set confirm to true to proceed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteYesThe Search Console property. Either a URL-prefix property ("https://navid.me/", trailing slash included) or a domain property ("sc-domain:navid.me"). A bare hostname is read as a domain property. Call list_sites for the exact strings this account owns, because the two shapes are different properties and mixing them up returns a 403.
accountNoWhich signed-in Google account to act as, by email. Omit to use the default. Call list_accounts to see what is signed in.
confirmNoSet true only when the user asked for exactly this action.
sitemap_urlYesFull URL of the sitemap to stop tracking.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • removedInput schema / properties / confirm / default
      Removed value: -false
    • changedInput schema / properties / confirm / description
      Previous value: -"Set true to proceed. The submission history for this sitemap is not recoverable."New value: +"Set true only when the user asked for exactly this action."
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, non-idempotent and openWorld, but the description goes further by enumerating exactly what is and is not destroyed: no deindexing, no file deletion, loss of submission history and per-sitemap coverage. That is precisely the context an agent needs before a destructive call.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and scope, then the negative consequences, then the gating flag. No filler or repetition.

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 destructive, no-output-schema tool, the description supplies the blast radius, the irreversible-loss detail, and the confirmation gate — everything an agent needs to call it safely. Return values are unnecessary since the operation produces no meaningful payload.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all four parameters (including the nuanced site-vs-domain property distinction and account selection) are fully documented in the schema itself. The description's only parameter remark, 'Set confirm to true to proceed', largely restates the schema's confirm description, adding little beyond the baseline.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Stop tracking a sitemap on a property') and immediately scopes what the operation does not touch. An agent can distinguish it from delete_site, submit_sitemap, and delete_sitemap siblings without opening any schema.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives clear operational context — it does not deindex URLs or delete the file, and requires confirm=true to proceed. It does not, however, name the alternative tools (e.g. delete_site for removing the property itself), so sibling routing is left partly to inference.

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