Find Bing queries that rank high but have low click-through rates, revealing opportunities to improve CTR.
Identify high-ranking Bing queries with lower than expected CTR
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| siteUrl | Yes | The URL of the site | |
| minImpressions | No | Minimum impressions threshold (default 500) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It implies a read-only analytical operation but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as data mutability, authentication requirements, rate limits, or specifics of how 'lower than expected CTR' is determined.
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 a single concise sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. Every word is informative, no fluff.
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?
The tool has no output schema, and the description does not hint at the return format or how to interpret results. Given the simplicity of the tool (2 params, analysis only), it is minimally complete but could benefit from specifying output type or usage examples.
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%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any extra meaning beyond the schema's param descriptions. It does not explain the significance of siteUrl or minImpressions default.
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 clearly states the tool identifies high-ranking Bing queries with lower than expected CTR, specifying the search engine and the condition. It distinguishes from siblings like bing_seo_cannibalization and seo_low_ctr_opportunities.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description only states what it does, without mentioning when-not-to-use or contrasting with similar tools like seo_low_ctr_opportunities or bing_seo_lost_queries.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.