Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Hugging Face

by co.huggingface
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Repo Search

hub_repo_search
Read-only

Search and list Hugging Face models, datasets and Spaces (sort by downloads, likes, trending) with a shared query interface. You can target models, datasets, spaces, or aggregate across multiple repo types in one call. Include links to repositories in your response.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "hub_repo_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
sortNoSort order (descending): trendingScore, downloads, likes, createdAt, lastModified
limitNoMaximum number of results to return per selected repo type
queryNoSearch term. Leave blank and specify sort + limit to browse trending or recent repositories.
authorNoOrganization or user namespace to filter by (e.g. 'google', 'meta-llama', 'huggingface').
filtersNoOptional hub filter tags. Applied to each selected repo type (e.g. ["text-generation"], ["language:en"], ["mcp-server"]).
repo_typesNoRepository types to search. Defaults to ["model", "dataset"]. space uses keyword search via /api/spaces.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Removed value: -false
  2. Added

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the available sort dimensions and the fact that one call can span multiple repo types, but says nothing about result pagination, caps (the schema's limit max of 100), or the differing behavior of space search via /api/spaces. The closing instruction about including links is useful output framing.

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?

Two compact sentences front-load the scope and capability, with no padding. The middle clause ('You can target models, datasets, spaces, or aggregate...') partly repeats the first sentence, and the trailing response-formatting instruction is a slight structural intrusion, but nothing is verbose.

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?

For a read-only, zero-required-parameter search tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers what is searched, how it can be sorted and scoped, and even hints at the return payload via the link instruction. It falls short only on result-limit and pagination behavior, which an agent might want before calling.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented, and the description adds little beyond restating that sorting spans downloads/likes/trending and that repo types can be aggregated. It does not clarify interplay between query, filters and author beyond what the schema says. Baseline 3 applies.

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 description uses a specific verb ('Search and list') plus the resource ('Hugging Face models, datasets and Spaces') and states the aggregation behavior across repo types. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling tools (hub_repo_details, hf_fs, hf_whoami) by being a discovery/search tool, though it never names or contrasts them explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies when to use it (target a repo type or aggregate across several, sort by downloads/likes/trending) but gives no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to hub_repo_details for fetching a single repository. The practical browse-without-query pattern lives only in the schema, not the description.

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

All Hugging Face toolsInspect
Try in Browser
Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources