Skip to main content
Glama
thenavidm

Google Search Console MCP

by thenavidm
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

Inspect several URLs

inspect_urls
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check a batch of URLs on one Search Console property to see if Google indexed them, the canonical it chose, and the last crawl date.

Instructions

Inspect several URLs on the same property in one call and get a compact table back: indexed or not, the canonical Google chose, and the last crawl. Use it to check a batch of pages after a launch or a migration. Requests run a few at a time to stay inside the per-minute quota, and one URL failing does not sink the rest. Keep batches small: the daily quota is about 2000 inspections per property.

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.
urlsYesUp to 50 URLs, all under the property.
accountNoWhich signed-in Google account to act as, by email. Omit to use the default. Call list_accounts to see what is signed in.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0
    • removedInput schema / $schema
      Removed value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
  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?

Goes well beyond the annotations by disclosing concurrency/throttling ("run a few at a time to stay inside the per-minute quota"), partial-failure semantics ("one URL failing does not sink the rest"), and a numeric quota ceiling (~2000 inspections/day/property). These are operational facts an agent cannot infer from readOnlyHint/idempotentHint.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with purpose and return value, then usage, then operational constraints. No wasted clauses or restated schema.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the return-value burden and does so (indexed/not, canonical, last crawl). Combined with quota, throttling, and partial-failure notes, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and reason about failures.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented, including the site-shape 403 warning. The description reinforces that all URLs must belong to the property but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 with scope ("several URLs on the same property in one call") and names the return contents (indexation status, Google's canonical, last crawl). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling inspect_url, which handles a single URL.

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 an explicit triggering scenario ("check a batch of pages after a launch or a migration") and a caution about batch sizing. It stops short of explicitly naming inspect_url as the single-URL alternative, but the batch framing makes the split obvious.

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