| name | whitespark-tool |
| description | When the user wants citation gap analysis, managed citation building, review generation campaigns, or local rank tracking. Trigger on "Whitespark," "citation finder," "where are my competitors listed," "citation gap," "build citations," "review generation tool," or "get more reviews." Note that Whitespark does NOT have an MCP server — it's dashboard-driven with limited API. |
| metadata | {"version":"1.1.0","author":"Garrett Smith"} |
Whitespark Tool
Note: Local SEO Data (localseodata-tool) now covers citation audits via citation_audit. Use Local SEO Data as default for citation data. Whitespark remains a preferred tool for citation building, rank tracking, and review generation campaigns (Reputation Builder).
Whitespark does NOT have an MCP server. Two of its products now expose REST APIs — the Local Rank Tracker and Local Ranking Grids (geogrids), both in beta — so an agent can pull ranking and grid data directly for those. Its citation products have no API and remain dashboard/managed, so for citations the agent's role is to guide what to do in Whitespark and interpret data the user provides. See the Whitespark APIs section below.
When to Use Whitespark vs Other Tools
| You Need | Use Whitespark | Use Instead |
|---|
| Citation gap analysis (competitor vs you) | ✅ Local Citation Finder | BrightLocal (also does this, has MCP) |
| Managed citation building (done-for-you) | ✅ Best quality service | BrightLocal (also offers this) |
| Review generation campaigns (email/SMS) | ✅ Reputation Builder | — |
| Review monitoring | ✅ | BrightLocal (has MCP, may be better for agent access) |
| Local rank tracking | ✅ | Local SEO Data, Local Falcon (geogrid is superior for local) |
| Citation accuracy audit | ⚠️ Can do it | BrightLocal (better for NAP accuracy scoring) |
| Keyword research | ❌ | Local SEO Data, Semrush, Ahrefs |
| Backlink analysis | ❌ | Local SEO Data, Ahrefs |
| Technical audit | ❌ | Screaming Frog |
| Geogrid rankings | ✅ | Local SEO Data, Local Falcon |
Whitespark vs BrightLocal
These two overlap significantly. Here's when to use which:
| Feature | Whitespark | BrightLocal |
|---|
| Citation building quality | ✅ Higher quality (manual review) | Good but more automated |
| Citation gap finder | ✅ More thorough | ✅ Also good |
| NAP accuracy scoring | Basic | ✅ Better scoring system |
| MCP server available | ❌ No | ✅ Yes |
| Review generation | ✅ Reputation Builder | ✅ Also has this |
| White-label reports | Basic | ✅ Better reporting |
| Industry reputation | ✅ Citation specialists | ✅ All-in-one local SEO |
| Pricing | Per-service | Subscription |
Recommendation: If MCP connectivity matters (agent can pull data directly), use BrightLocal. If citation building quality is the priority and the user is willing to use the dashboard, Whitespark's managed service is excellent.
Core Workflows
Citation Gap Analysis
When: User wants to find directories where competitors are listed but they aren't.
What to do in Whitespark:
- Run Local Citation Finder for target business AND 2-3 competitors
- Compare citation sources across all businesses
- Identify directories where competitors appear but user doesn't
What the agent can do:
- Guide the user on which competitors to check
- Interpret the citation gap report when the user shares results
- Prioritize which directories to target first
Citation priority framework:
- Tier 1 (must-have): Google, Apple, Bing, Yelp, Facebook, data aggregators
- Tier 2 (important): Industry-specific directories (Healthgrades, Avvo, Angi, etc.)
- Tier 3 (nice-to-have): Local directories, chamber of commerce, BBB
- Tier 4 (low priority): General web directories, niche sites
Managed Citation Building
When: Citation gaps identified and user wants help building them.
What Whitespark does:
- Manual submission to directories (higher quality than automated tools)
- Verification that listings are live and accurate
- Ongoing maintenance options
What to tell the user:
- Provide exact NAP (must match GBP)
- Provide business description, categories, photos
- Specify target directories from the gap analysis
- Expect 2-4 week turnaround for most directories
- Re-audit in 6-8 weeks to verify everything is live and accurate
Review Generation (Reputation Builder)
When: User needs to systematically generate more Google reviews.
How Reputation Builder works:
- Import customer list (email or phone)
- Send automated review request via email or SMS
- Directs happy customers to Google review page
- Tracks who received requests, who left reviews
What the agent should guide:
- Timing: Send review requests 1-3 days after service completion
- Message: Keep it short, personal, include direct Google review link
- Volume: Steady stream (5-10/week) is better than burst of 50
- Filtering: Don't send to known unhappy customers (avoid negative reviews)
- Compliance: Don't incentivize reviews, don't gate (filter based on rating)
Review velocity targets by business type:
| Business Type | Monthly Review Target | Rationale |
|---|
| Restaurant | 15-30 | High transaction volume |
| Medical practice | 8-15 | Moderate patient volume |
| Home services | 5-10 | Lower transaction frequency |
| Legal | 3-5 | Fewer clients, harder to ask |
| B2B services | 2-4 | Low volume, high value |
Local Rank Tracking
When: User uses Whitespark's rank tracker.
Whitespark's rank tracker is point-based (single location), not geogrid.
What the agent should know:
- This shows ranking at ONE point for a keyword — not geographic coverage
- For local businesses, Local Falcon geogrid is far more useful
- Whitespark rank tracking is fine for organic keyword tracking alongside geogrid
Whitespark APIs
Two Whitespark products expose REST APIs. Both are beta — endpoints and response shapes may change — and neither is an MCP server, so calls are made directly or via a custom integration, not through an agent connector. There is no citation API; citation building and audits stay in the dashboard/managed service.
For citation data, LocalSEOData (citation_audit) is the default. For geogrid depth beyond what the grids API exposes, LocalSEOData (geogrid_scan) or Local Falcon give point-level data.
Local Ranking Grids (Geogrid) API
Reference: https://lrg.whitespark.ca/api-docs
Built for reporting integration — pulling grid summaries and embedding grid visuals into reports/dashboards. It does not expose the underlying grid data points.
Auth: Bearer token in the Authorization header. Generate the token in-app under profile dropdown → API Access.
Endpoints:
GET /grids — paginated list of your ranking grids with summary metrics: visibility score, average rank, and review score. Pagination via page (default 1) and per_page (default 50, max 100). Response is data plus a meta object (current_page, last_page, per_page, total).GET /grid/{grid_id}/download-screenshot/{mode} — returns the most recent screenshot for a grid; mode is with-metrics or without-metrics. grid_id is the UUID from the grid's URL. Returns 404 if no screenshot exists. Embeddable via <img>. Enable Automatic screenshots on the API access page so every completed scan refreshes this URL.
Not available via the API (dashboard only): individual data points within a grid, competitor data points, creating grids, and modifying grids or run schedules.
Use it for: embedding an always-current geogrid image and pulling visibility score / average rank / review score into a monthly report or portfolio rollup. Don't reach for it when you need per-point rankings or competitor grids — use geogrid_scan (LocalSEOData) or Local Falcon.
Local Rank Tracker API
Reference: https://whitespark-api.apidocumentation.com/rank-tracker-api-reference
Beta (v1.0.0, OpenAPI 3.0.0), with separate live and test base URLs. Auth: API key passed as a header.
Organized around three resource groups:
- campaigns — list and read rank-tracking campaigns (a campaign is the container for a business's tracked keywords and locations)
- campaign — operate on a single campaign
- rankings — pull ranking results for tracked keywords
The underlying tracker covers Google and Bing across Local Pack, Maps, and organic, desktop and mobile, up to 100 positions, with geo-targeting and a weighted Visibility Score. Verify exact paths, parameters, and response schemas in the API reference above — the beta docs are the source of truth, and the "Download OpenAPI Document" link there provides the full schema. Beta questions go to troy@whitespark.ca.
Use it for: automating organic/Local Pack keyword-position and Visibility Score pulls into recurring reports alongside geogrid data. Don't reach for it when geographic coverage matters more than single-point positions — that's what the grids API and geogrid_scan are for.
What to Do Next
| What You Found | Next Action | Skill |
|---|
| Citation gaps identified | Build missing citations, starting with Tier 1 | local-citations |
| Citations built, waiting for propagation | Work on other optimization while waiting (4-8 weeks) | gbp-optimization, review-management |
| Review generation campaign running | Monitor velocity and adjust messaging if response rate is low | review-management |
| Citation data needs to go in a report | Include in audit or monthly report | client-deliverables, local-reporting |
| Need MCP-accessible citation data | Use BrightLocal instead | brightlocal-tool |
| Need grid visuals or summary metrics in a report | Pull via the Local Ranking Grids API | local-reporting, client-deliverables |
| Need keyword positions or Visibility Score in a report | Pull via the Local Rank Tracker API | local-reporting |
Default next step: Whitespark's strength is managed citation services. If you need automated, agent-accessible citation data, use BrightLocal. If you need the highest-quality citation building, use Whitespark's managed service.
