Analyze Bing search queries that have experienced a significant decline in traffic relative to the previous period, enabling targeted recovery actions.
Identify queries that lost significant traffic on Bing compared to the previous period.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| siteUrl | Yes | The URL of the site | |
| days | No | Lookback period in days (default 28) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the high-level purpose without explaining how 'significant traffic loss' is determined, whether the operation is read-only, or any side effects.
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 very concise at one sentence, but it is not overly detailed. It could benefit from a bit more context without being verbose.
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?
Without an output schema or annotations, the description lacks information on return format, result count, or how results are presented. This is insufficient for a query analysis tool.
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%, with both parameters having descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 clearly states the verb 'Identify' and the resource 'queries that lost significant traffic on Bing compared to the previous period.' It is specific enough to differentiate from sibling tools like bing_seo_cannibalization, though 'significant' is somewhat vague.
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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling tools (e.g., bing_get_top_queries, bing_analytics_compare_periods). There are no when-not-to-use or alternative recommendations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.