Lune Research

Search research guidance

search_research_guidance

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use before recommending experimental design, ablation strategy, evaluation metrics, baselines, reproducibility, paper structure, related-work organisation, venue choice, response-to-reviewers, scientific writing, or methodology in general. Searches the Lune guidance corpus, curated from senior researchers, reproducibility checklists, venue-reviewer guidance, and author tutorials, so methodology advice can cite vetted sources. Triggering questions: “how should I design an ablation for X”, “what's a good evaluation setup for retrieval”, “how do I respond to reviewer 2”, “what's the reproducibility checklist for NeurIPS”, “how should I structure the related-work section”, “what venue should I target for a systems paper on X”. Returns top-K excerpts with source attribution; cite every entry you draw on.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_research_guidance"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`results`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, and the description adds useful context beyond that: the corpus is curated and vetted, results come back as top-K excerpts with source attribution, and the agent is instructed to cite every entry it draws on. It does not discuss behavior when no matches are found or how excerpts relate to the full-document sibling.

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?

Front-loaded with the imperative usage cue, then provenance, then example triggers, then return/citation expectations — a sensible information hierarchy. The long enumeration of topic areas and example questions is somewhat dense but each item genuinely helps an agent pattern-match a user request.

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?

An output schema exists, so return structure need not be described, yet the description still usefully notes top-K excerpts with source attribution and the citation obligation. Coverage is strong for a two-parameter search tool; the only gap is not clarifying when to escalate to get_research_guidance_doc for a full document.

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 0%, so the schema documents only types and bounds (limit 1-20 default 5, query 1-500 chars) without explaining intent. The description partially compensates by mentioning 'top-K excerpts', which implicitly explains limit, and the triggering questions illustrate the kind of free-text query expected, but neither parameter's semantics are spelled out.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Searches the Lune guidance corpus') and immediately qualifies the corpus provenance (senior researchers, reproducibility checklists, venue-reviewer guidance, author tutorials). This clearly separates it from paper-retrieval siblings like search_papers or get_paper_fulltext, which target literature rather than methodology guidance.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The opening 'Use before recommending experimental design, ablation strategy, ...' plus five concrete triggering questions give an agent very clear activation conditions. It stops short of explicit when-not-to-use guidance and never names alternatives (e.g., get_research_guidance_doc for full documents), which keeps it from a 5.

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

All Lune Research tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.