Submit multiple URLs to Google or Bing search engines for indexing in batch, with daily quotas of 200 for Google and 500 for Bing.
Submit multiple URLs for indexing in batch. Google: max 200 (daily quota), Bing: max 500.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| siteUrl | Yes | The property URL as registered in Search Console | |
| urls | Yes | List of URLs to submit for indexing | |
| engine | No | The search engine (default: google) |
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 the burden. It discloses the batch submission behavior and quotas, but lacks details on idempotency, error handling, or whether it overwrites existing submissions. Provides moderate transparency.
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?
Two sentences: first sentence clearly states the purpose, second adds critical quota context. No fluff, highly efficient.
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?
No output schema, but the description covers essential: purpose, engine distinction, and quotas. Missing details on return values (e.g., confirmation, error messages) but adequate for a batch submission tool with moderate complexity.
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 schema already documents parameters. The description adds value by specifying quotas ('max 200 daily' for Google, 'max 500' for Bing), which goes beyond the schema. However, it does not elaborate on the 'siteUrl' parameter beyond what the schema provides.
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?
Clearly states the verb 'Submit', resource 'multiple URLs for indexing', and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'indexing_submit_url' (singular) and 'bing_url_submit_batch' (Bing-specific). Includes quotas for both Google and Bing, enhancing clarity.
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?
Provides explicit context on daily quotas per engine, helping the agent decide when to use batch submission (e.g., high volume) and which engine. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'indexing_submit_url' for single URLs.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.