Google Search Console MCP Server

compare_search_periods

Compare search analytics data between two time periods to measure changes in clicks, impressions, CTR, and average position against a baseline, helping identify performance trends.

Instructions

Compare search analytics data between two time periods.

Direction: Period 1 is the period you are analyzing and Period 2 is the baseline
you compare it against. All deltas are Period 1 relative to Period 2, and the
percentage baseline is Period 2. A positive value means Period 1 outperformed
Period 2 — more clicks/impressions, higher CTR, or a better (lower) average
position. For a current-vs-previous comparison, pass the current period as
Period 1 and the previous period as Period 2. Percentages are null when the
Period 2 baseline is zero.

Args:
    site_url: Exact GSC property URL from list_properties (e.g. "https://example.com/" or
              "sc-domain:example.com"). Domain properties cover all subdomains — use the
              domain property as site_url and filter by page to analyze a specific subdomain.
    period1_start: Start date for period 1 / the analyzed period (YYYY-MM-DD)
    period1_end: End date for period 1 / the analyzed period (YYYY-MM-DD)
    period2_start: Start date for period 2 / the baseline period (YYYY-MM-DD)
    period2_end: End date for period 2 / the baseline period (YYYY-MM-DD)
    dimensions: Dimensions to group by (default: query)
    limit: Number of top results to compare (default: 10)

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`limit`	No
`site_url`	Yes
`dimensions`	No	query
`period1_end`	Yes
`period2_end`	Yes
`period1_start`	Yes
`period2_start`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.4.1Oct 26, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose important behavioral semantics: delta direction, percentage baseline, positive-value meaning, and null percentages when baseline is zero. It does not explicitly state read-only status, permissions, pagination, or rate limits, but the analytic comparison nature is clear.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then organized into direction semantics and argument explanations. It is somewhat long, but most sentences earn their place by clarifying comparison direction or parameter meaning.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The tool has seven parameters, no annotations, no schema descriptions, and an output schema. The description compensates well for the parameter and comparison semantics, and need not explain return values because an output schema exists. It could be more complete by naming when to prefer this over other search analytics tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate and it does. It documents every parameter: site_url format and domain-property caveat, all four date formats and roles, dimensions default, and limit meaning as top results.

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?

The first sentence states a specific verb and resource: comparing search analytics data between two time periods. It is clear enough to distinguish from simple retrieval tools in practice, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like get_search_analytics or get_advanced_search_analytics.

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?

The description gives clear usage context, especially the current-vs-previous example and the rule that Period 1 is analyzed while Period 2 is baseline. It does not name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, so it stops short of full sibling routing guidance.

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