面向AI助手的亚马逊搜索趋势数据 衡量真实的消费者购买意图。亚马逊搜索量揭示的是人们正在积极寻找购买的商品——而不仅仅是研究。历史需求曲线和增长信号，可由你的AI查询。
完整文档和在线演示： https://trendsmcp.ai/amazon-search-trends
属于 Trends MCP —— 提供12+数据源实时趋势数据的MCP服务器。 查看主仓库：https://github.com/trendsmcp/trends-mcp
第一步： 在 trendsmcp.ai 获取免费API密钥 每天100次请求，无需信用卡。
第二步： 添加到你的AI客户端（将 YOUR_API_KEY 替换为你的密钥）：
Cursor / Windsurf / Cline （~/.cursor/mcp.json 或等效文件）
{
"mcpServers": {
"trends-mcp": {
"url": "https://api.trendsmcp.ai/mcp",
"transport": "http",
"headers": { "Authorization": "Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" }
}
}
}VS Code / GitHub Copilot （.vscode/mcp.json）
{
"servers": {
"trends-mcp": {
"type": "http",
"url": "https://api.trendsmcp.ai/mcp",
"headers": { "Authorization": "Bearer YOUR_API_KEY" }
}
}
}Claude Desktop （claude_desktop_config.json）
用户 → 设置 → 开发者 → 编辑配置 — 在 mcpServers 内添加
{
"mcpServers": {
"trends-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"mcp-remote",
"https://api.trendsmcp.ai/mcp",
"--header",
"Authorization:${AUTH_HEADER}"
],
"env": {
"AUTH_HEADER": "Bearer YOUR_API_KEY"
}
}
}
}Claude.ai（浏览器） 设置 -> 连接器 -> 添加自定义连接器：
https://api.trendsmcp.ai/mcpRelated MCP server: amazon-trends-mcp
连接后，向你的AI提问：
get_trends(keyword='air fryer', source='amazon', data_mode='weekly')工具 | 功能说明 |
| 获取该数据源上某个关键词的时间序列数据 |
| 获取1周、1月、3月、6月、1年周期的增长率 |
| 获取该数据源上当前的热门趋势 |
| 按搜索量排序的热门主题 |
亚马逊产品搜索量趋势——反映消费者购买意图的归一化兴趣随时间变化。这与谷歌搜索数据不同，因为亚马逊查询代表的是主动购买意图，而非一般信息搜索。
有用。将产品关键词在亚马逊和谷歌上的需求进行对比，可以了解消费者意图主要是信息性的还是交易性的。亚马逊搜索量上升是一个强烈的购买信号。
可以。使用品类关键词如“蓝牙耳机”或“蛋白粉”，信号会聚合该品类在亚马逊上的整体需求。
所有值均归一化到0-100的尺度，以便进行一致比较。同时会返回归一化信号旁边的绝对搜索量估算值。
Trends MCP 一次连接覆盖12+数据源： 谷歌搜索、YouTube、TikTok、Reddit、亚马逊、维基百科、 新闻情感、网站流量、应用下载、Steam、npm 等。
浏览全部：https://trendsmcp.ai/data-sources
相同的API密钥可直接在Python中使用，无需MCP主机。
pip install amazon-trends-mcpimport os
from amazon_trends_mcp import TrendsMcpClient, SOURCE
client = TrendsMcpClient(api_key=os.environ["TRENDSMCP_API_KEY"])
series = client.get_trends(source=SOURCE, keyword="your keyword")
growth = client.get_growth(source=SOURCE, keyword="your keyword", percent_growth=["1M", "3M", "12M"])
top = client.get_top_trends(type="Amazon", limit=10)MIT © Trends MCP
Point-to-point growth for a keyword on one or more sources. Each window is a preset string (12M, 3M, YTD, and the other listed periods). Values are on a 0-100 scale, plus absolute volume when available. Prefer this over get_time_series for growth questions. app downloads and app rankings are keyword sources (Android bundle ID). They are not the App Store / Google Play live boards on get_top_trends. If the request is rate limited or the monthly quota is used up, tell the user their plan limit is reached.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | One source, or comma-separated sources (e.g. 'amazon, tiktok, youtube'). Valid: 'google search', 'google images', 'google news', 'google shopping', 'youtube', 'wikipedia', 'tiktok', 'reddit', 'amazon', 'news sentiment', 'news volume', 'npm', 'python', 'steam', 'app downloads', 'app rankings'. | |
| keyword | Yes | What to look up. The string format is required by source. Standard sources (google search, google images, google news, google shopping, youtube, wikipedia, tiktok, reddit, amazon, news sentiment, news volume): any name or phrase, e.g. 'nike'. npm: exact npmjs.com package name, case-sensitive. Right: 'react', '@babel/core'. Wrong: 'React', 'React.js'. python: exact PyPI project name. Right: 'pandas', 'requests'. Wrong: 'Pandas'. steam: game display name in plain English, not a Steam App ID. Right: 'Elden Ring', 'CS2'. First Steam store search result wins, so use an unambiguous name. app downloads and app rankings: Android bundle ID only (the id= value on Google Play). Right: 'com.openai.chatgpt', 'com.whatsapp'. Wrong: 'ChatGPT', 'WhatsApp', an iOS App Store ID, or a bundle ID that is not Android. Find it at play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=THIS_PART. If the request includes app downloads or app rankings with other sources, keyword must still be the Android bundle ID. | |
| percent_growth | No | Growth windows. Default if omitted: ['12M']. Each item must be a preset string: '7D', '1W', '14D', '2W', '30D', '1M', '2M', '3M', '6M', '9M', '12M', '1Y', '18M', '24M', '2Y', '36M', '3Y', '48M', '4Y', '60M', '5Y', 'MTD', 'QTD', 'YTD'. Every preset is a two-date comparison. |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond the readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint annotations, the description adds useful behavioral context: values are on a 0-100 scale with absolute volume when available, and the agent should tell the user their plan limit is reached on rate limiting or quota exhaustion. These details are not present in the structured fields and do not contradict the annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is compact and every sentence earns its place: core operation, output scale, sibling preference, app-source caveat, and rate-limit handling. It front-loads the primary purpose and avoids redundant phrasing.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With a detailed input schema, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description fills the remaining gaps: tool selection, output scale, source disambiguation, and error behavior. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly without further inference.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already documents all parameters thoroughly, including valid sources, keyword formatting rules per source, and every preset growth window. The description references preset windows and Android bundle IDs but does not add meaning beyond the schema, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific action and resource: 'Point-to-point growth for a keyword on one or more sources.' It also names sibling tools to disambiguate itself, stating it is preferred over get_time_series for growth questions and clarifying that app sources are not the live boards on get_top_trends.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
It gives an explicit selection rule: 'Prefer this over get_time_series for growth questions.' It also warns against confusing app downloads/app rankings with get_top_trends live boards, and specifies how to handle rate limits or quota exhaustion. This gives the agent clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Full historical series for one keyword and one source (0-100 values, plus volume when available). Use for charting or custom math. Not for live 'what's trending now' boards (use get_top_trends). For most growth questions, use get_growth. If the request is rate limited or the monthly quota is used up, tell the user their plan limit is reached.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| source | Yes | Exactly one source per request. Valid: 'google search', 'google images', 'google news', 'google shopping', 'youtube', 'wikipedia', 'tiktok', 'reddit', 'amazon', 'news sentiment', 'news volume', 'npm', 'python', 'steam', 'app downloads', 'app rankings'. | |
| keyword | Yes | What to look up. The string format is required by source. Standard sources (google search, google images, google news, google shopping, youtube, wikipedia, tiktok, reddit, amazon, news sentiment, news volume): any name or phrase, e.g. 'tesla'. npm: exact npmjs.com package name, case-sensitive. Right: 'react', '@babel/core'. Wrong: 'React', 'React.js'. python: exact PyPI project name. Right: 'pandas', 'requests'. Wrong: 'Pandas'. steam: game display name in plain English, not a Steam App ID. Right: 'Elden Ring', 'CS2'. First Steam store search result wins, so use an unambiguous name. app downloads and app rankings: Android bundle ID only (the id= value on Google Play). Right: 'com.openai.chatgpt', 'com.whatsapp'. Wrong: 'ChatGPT', 'WhatsApp', an iOS App Store ID, or a bundle ID that is not Android. Find it at play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=THIS_PART. |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already cover readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds behavioral context beyond those hints: the 0-100 value range, volume availability, and rate-limit/quota handling instructions. This provides useful operational detail that annotations do not convey, though the core safety profile is already covered by hints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, each earning its place: purpose and scope, usage routing, and error handling. Front-loaded with the core purpose; no repetition or fluff. The alternative tool routing is included efficiently.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given a two-parameter tool with a full output schema, the description covers purpose, usage scenarios, alternatives, and error handling. An agent has all necessary information to decide when to call it and what to expect, with no critical gaps.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters have detailed, source-specific descriptions (e.g., keyword format per source, valid source list). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond restating 'one keyword and one source', so the baseline for full schema coverage applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description explicitly states it returns 'Full historical series for one keyword and one source' with a value range and volume detail. It distinguishes itself from siblings get_top_trends and get_growth by stating what it is not for (live trending, growth questions), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Directly states when to use it: 'Use for charting or custom math' and when not to: 'Not for live trending (use get_top_trends)' and 'For most growth questions, use get_growth'. Also provides explicit handling for rate-limited or quota-exhausted requests, which is actionable guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Live top-trending board for exactly one feed type. No keyword. For 'Amazon Best Sellers by Category', 'Google Trends by Category', 'Top Websites', and 'Substack by Category', always pass category. Default sort is current rank. Use sort='rank_change' for climbers vs a prior snapshot (window 1d, 3d, 7d, 14d, or 30d). App Store Top Free, App Store Top Paid, and Google Play are live store boards, not keyword lookups. For an app's history use get_growth or get_time_series with source app downloads or app rankings and an Android bundle ID. Do not use get_time_series for live boards. If the request is rate limited or the monthly quota is used up, tell the user their plan limit is reached.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| sort | No | How to rank the board. 'rank' (default): current leaders. 'rank_change': biggest climbers vs a prior snapshot. Mover rows include rank, keyword, prev_rank, and rank_change. | rank |
| type | Yes | Exactly one live feed. Valid: 'Amazon Best Sellers Top Rated', 'Amazon Best Sellers by Category', 'App Store Top Free', 'App Store Top Paid', 'GitHub', 'Google News Top News', 'Google Play', 'Google Trends', 'Google Trends by Category', 'IMDb MOVIEmeter', 'Open Library Trending Books', 'Reddit Hot Posts', 'Reddit World News', 'Top Websites', 'Spotify Top Podcasts', 'Steam Most Played', 'Substack', 'Substack by Category', 'TikTok Trending Hashtags', 'TikTok Trending Searches', 'Wikipedia Trending', 'X (Twitter) Trending', 'YouTube Trending'. | |
| limit | No | Max rows to return. Default 25, min 1, max 200. | |
| offset | No | Rows to skip for pagination. Default 0. | |
| window | No | Lookback used only when sort is 'rank_change'. One of '1d', '3d', '7d', '14d', '30d'. Default '30d'. Short windows only work on daily feeds; weekly and monthly feeds return a note pointing to a longer window. | 30d |
| category | No | Pass this whenever type is 'Amazon Best Sellers by Category', 'Google Trends by Category', 'Top Websites', or 'Substack by Category'. Use the official name. Without it those feeds mix every board. Only omit on a first pull to learn the official names. |
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Beyond readOnlyHint/idempotentHint, the description adds important behavioral context: rate limits and monthly quota handling, default sort behavior, rank-change snapshot windows, category omission behavior, and feed-type quirks. It discloses how the tool behaves in edge cases, which is exactly the kind of transparency that helps an agent.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is dense but every sentence earns its place: purpose, category rule, sort semantics, alternative tool routing, and rate-limit behavior are all covered in a compact, front-loaded format. No filler or repetition.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given six parameters, sibling tools, and an output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs: valid feed types, category requirements, sort/window semantics, pagination defaults handled in schema, alternatives, and rate-limit response. Nothing essential is missing.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable non-obvious semantics: category is mandatory for four specific feed types and mixing occurs otherwise, and sort='rank_change' compares against a prior snapshot. This goes beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description states a specific verb and resource: it returns a live top-trending board for exactly one feed type, and explicitly says 'No keyword.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_growth and get_time_series without needing to open the schema.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: pass category for certain feeds, use sort='rank_change' for climbers, and use get_growth or get_time_series for app history. It even warns 'Do not use get_time_series for live boards,' giving clear exclusions and alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0get_growthget_time_seriesget_top_trendsScored across 3 tools
Each tool targets a distinct purpose: get_growth for point-to-point growth, get_time_series for full historical data, and get_top_trends for live boards. The descriptions explicitly cross-reference and disambiguate overlaps, making misselection unlikely.
All tool names follow the same get_ verb-prefix pattern with clear resource nouns (growth, time_series, top_trends). The naming is uniform and predictable.
Three tools cover the core actions of a trends MCP server well: growth lookup, historical series, and live top trends. The scope is tight and each tool earns its place.
The surface covers primary workflows: historical, growth, and live trending. Minor gaps exist, such as no explicit tool for listing available feed types, categories, or sources, but agents can infer them from descriptions and the core functionality is complete.
Amazon product search volume and best-seller trends. Free key at trendsapi.ai
Real-time Amazon product, seller, and search data for AI agents across 21 marketplaces.
Product and category demand signals across Amazon and social. Free key at trendsapi.ai
Amazon keyword volume, reverse-ASIN, and SERP data across 11 marketplaces.
