Skip to main content
Glama

docs-mcp

by com.redpanda

Server Details

Get authoritative answers about Redpanda documentation and search API references.

If you are the author of this connector, you can claim ownership with GitHub, an HTTP challenge, or a DNS record. Claimed connector authors can inspect health checks, view analytics, and manage their listing.
Status
Healthy
Last Tested
Transport
Streamable HTTP
URL
Repository
redpanda-data/docs-site
GitHub Stars
1

Available Tools

5 tools
ask_redpanda_questionSearch Redpanda SourcesAInspect

Search the official Redpanda documentation and return the most relevant sections from it for a user query. Each returned section includes the url and its actual content in markdown. Use this tool for all queries that require Redpanda knowledge. Results are ordered by relevance, with the most relevant result returned first. If you know the user's deployment platform, pass "platform" so results from the other platform's docs are excluded. Note that "platform" filters the sections already retrieved rather than re-running the search, so it can return substantially fewer sections: on a broker-level question where most matches come from the other platform's docs, it can cut a 15-section response to 1 or 2. Omit "platform" if you would rather have more context and judge platform relevance yourself from each section's url.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
top_kNoMaximum number of sections to return, applied after platform filtering. Must be a positive integer.
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."
platformNoThe user's deployment platform. 'cloud' excludes Self-Managed sections; 'self-managed' excludes Redpanda Cloud sections. Platform-neutral docs (Connect, API reference, labs) are always kept. Applied after retrieval, so it shrinks the result set rather than finding more of the right platform's pages. Omit to search all docs.
questionYes

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behavior: returns url and markdown content, orders by relevance, and explains that platform filtering occurs post-retrieval and can drastically reduce results. This goes well beyond basic tool intent and informs agent expectations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then efficiently adds return format, usage, and a critical caveat. Every sentence contributes, and despite length, it remains tightly structured without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema, the description adequately explains return values (url + markdown content) and ordering. It also covers an important behavioral nuance with platform filtering, making it complete for an agent to effectively invoke the tool.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description adds meaningful semantics for the 'platform' parameter, explaining its post-filter effect and the trade-off of omitting it, which is not fully captured in the schema. The schema already covers 75% of parameters, but the platform nuance is valuable.

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?

The description clearly states the tool searches the official Redpanda documentation and returns relevant sections, which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_api_reference by targeting general Redpanda docs versus API reference content.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says to use this tool for all Redpanda knowledge queries, and provides detailed guidance on when to pass 'platform' versus omit it, including a concrete trade-off. This gives clear context on usage and how to adapt based on user deployment.

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

get_api_reference_contentGet API Reference ContentAInspect

Retrieve full content of API reference pages by URL. Returns complete endpoint details including parameters, request/response schemas, and examples.

Use this after finding pages via list_api_reference_pages or search_api_reference. Pass the URLs from those results directly.

Returns up to 10 pages per request. URLs must be from docs.redpanda.com/api/doc/*.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlsYesPage URLs to retrieve (max 10). Use URLs from list_api_reference_pages or search_api_reference results.
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals important constraints: 'Returns up to 10 pages per request' and 'URLs must be from docs.redpanda.com/api/doc/*.' It also sets expectations for the response content without describing error handling or authentication, which prevents a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three short paragraphs, each earning its place: the first states purpose, the second gives the usage workflow, and the third lists operational constraints. It is front-loaded with the key verb and resource, with no filler.

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 two-parameter retrieval tool without an output schema or annotations, the description is nearly complete. It explains what is returned, how to use it, and key constraints. It lacks only edge-case behavior like error handling or rate limits, but the core selection and invocation information is present.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already covers both parameters thoroughly, including the 'context' parameter rules. The description adds value by specifying the URL domain restriction and reiterating the 10-page limit, which goes beyond the schema's description for 'urls'.

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?

The description opens with 'Retrieve full content of API reference pages by URL' and clearly specifies the return value: 'complete endpoint details including parameters, request/response schemas, and examples.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by explaining it consumes URLs from list_api_reference_pages or search_api_reference.

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 description provides clear workflow guidance: 'Use this after finding pages via list_api_reference_pages or search_api_reference. Pass the URLs from those results directly.' It names the relevant sibling tools and implies the intended sequence, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

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

get_more_toolsAInspect

Check for additional tools whenever your task might benefit from specialized capabilities - even if existing tools could work as a fallback.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
contextYesA description of your goal and what kind of tool would help accomplish it.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the action ('Check for additional tools') but does not disclose what the tool returns or any side effects. The behavior is fairly self-explanatory for a discovery tool, but the output format is unspecified.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains when to use it but does not mention the return value or any further details. This leaves a moderate gap in understanding the tool's full behavior.

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?

The schema fully covers the one parameter 'context' with a clear description (100% coverage), so the tool description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 applies per the rules.

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?

The description clearly identifies the action ('Check for additional tools') and specifies the purpose ('whenever your task might benefit from specialized capabilities'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that handle API reference queries, like search_api_reference or get_api_reference_content.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly states when to use the tool ('whenever your task might benefit from specialized capabilities') and even encourages use when existing tools could work ('even if existing tools could work as a fallback'). This provides a clear decision rule for the agent.

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

list_api_reference_pagesList API Reference PagesAInspect

List pages in Redpanda API reference documentation. Returns endpoints, schemas, and topic pages with URL, title, type, and description.

SCOPING (important for accurate results):

  • api="all" or omit: Lists all available APIs

  • api="admin": Cluster management operations (brokers, partitions, configs, users)

  • api="cloud-controlplane": Redpanda Cloud resource management (clusters, networks, namespaces)

  • api="cloud-dataplane": Cloud cluster data operations (topics, ACLs, connectors)

  • api="http-proxy": Kafka operations over HTTP (produce, consume, offsets)

  • api="schema-registry": Schema management (register, retrieve, compatibility)

Use this to browse API structure. For general Redpanda docs, use ask_redpanda_question instead.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiNoWhich API to list: "all" or omit for overview of all APIs, or a specific API name (admin, cloud-controlplane, cloud-dataplane, http-proxy, schema-registry)
urlNoSpecific URL path to list children of (optional, defaults to API root)
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses the return fields and the exact scoping behavior for each api value, including that omitting api lists all. It does not mention pagination, authentication, or error handling, but for a read-only listing tool these are less critical. The scoping details go well beyond a generic statement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured: a one-sentence summary, a scoping list, and a final usage note. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler. The formatting improves scannability.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides a complete picture: what it does, what it returns, how to scope it, and when to use an alternative. The parameter semantics are thoroughly covered. Given the tool's simplicity, nothing essential is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the description adds substantial meaning beyond the schema. It elaborates on each api value (admin, cloud-controlplane, etc.) with concrete operation examples, which the schema does not provide. This makes the api parameter far more understandable and actionable.

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?

Description starts with a clear verb+resource: 'List pages in Redpanda API reference documentation.' It specifies what is returned (endpoints, schemas, topic pages with URL, title, type, description) and distinguishes from siblings by noting 'Use this to browse API structure' and pointing to ask_redpanda_question for general docs.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly states when to use this tool ('to browse API structure') and when not to ('For general Redpanda docs, use ask_redpanda_question instead'). The extensive scoping section gives detailed guidance on parameter values, making it clear how to target different APIs.

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

search_api_referenceSearch API ReferenceAInspect

Search Redpanda API reference documentation by keyword. Returns up to 20 matching endpoints, schemas, or topics with URL, title, and text excerpts.

SCOPING (important for accurate results):

  • api="all" or omit: Search across ALL APIs at once - useful when unsure which API contains the endpoint

  • api="admin": Search only cluster management (brokers, partitions, configs, users, maintenance)

  • api="cloud-controlplane": Search only Cloud resource management (clusters, networks, namespaces)

  • api="cloud-dataplane": Search only Cloud data operations (topics, ACLs, connectors)

  • api="http-proxy": Search only HTTP Proxy (produce, consume, offsets over HTTP)

  • api="schema-registry": Search only Schema Registry (register, retrieve, compatibility)

WHEN TO USE WHICH:

  • User asks "broker endpoints" → api="admin" (brokers are cluster management)

  • User asks "create topic API" → api="all" (topics exist in admin AND cloud-dataplane)

  • User asks "Cloud cluster API" → api="cloud-controlplane"

  • User asks about Redpanda APIs generally → api="all" or omit

For general Redpanda questions (not API-specific), use ask_redpanda_question instead.

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
apiNoScope: "all" or omit to search all APIs, or specific API name (admin, cloud-controlplane, cloud-dataplane, http-proxy, schema-registry)
typeNoFilter by type: operation (endpoints), schema (data types), topic (guides), authentication, webhook
queryYesSearch keywords (e.g., "broker", "create topic", "ACL")
contextYesExplain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): "Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization."

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the scope of results (up to 20 matches), the return components (URL, title, text excerpts), and the meaning of each api scoping value. However, it does not mention behaviors like no-results handling, ordering, or rate limits, which would strengthen transparency for a search tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is structured with clear headers (SCOPING, WHEN TO USE WHICH) and a final pointer to an alternative tool. While it is somewhat lengthy, every section serves a purpose: the scoping lists are essential for correct parameter use, and the examples are directly actionable. There is no filler or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, so the description must cover both input semantics and output behavior. It does this thoroughly: it describes the return format, explains all api scoping values, provides usage examples, and explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools. This is a complete, self-contained description for the agent.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The input schema already describes all parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds significant value by explaining the semantic meaning of each api value (admin, cloud-controlplane, etc.) and offering concrete examples of when to use each, which goes beyond the schema's terse 'Scope: all or omit' description. This raises the score above baseline.

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?

The description clearly specifies a verb ('Search') and a resource (Redpanda API reference documentation), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by stating that general Redpanda questions should use ask_redpanda_question instead. It also clarifies that it returns up to 20 matching endpoints, schemas, or topics with URL, title, and excerpts, making its purpose unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit 'WHEN TO USE WHICH' examples mapping user queries to specific api parameter values, and it explicitly directs non-API-specific questions to ask_redpanda_question. This is strong, actionable guidance that helps an agent choose this tool over alternatives and configure it correctly.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. 1 tool update
    • Changedask_redpanda_question4 fields changed
      • addedInput schema / properties / platform
        Added value: +{
+  "description": "The user's deployment platform. 'cloud' excludes Self-Managed sections; 'self-managed' excludes Redpanda Cloud sections. Platform-neutral docs (Connect, API reference, labs) are always kept. Applied after retrieval, so it shrinks the result set rather than finding more of the right platform's pages. Omit to search all docs.",
+  "enum": [
+    "cloud",
+    "self-managed"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
      • addedInput schema / properties / top_k / description
        Added value: +"Maximum number of sections to return, applied after platform filtering. Must be a positive integer."
      • addedInput schema / properties / top_k / exclusiveMinimum
        Added value: +0
      • changedInput schema / properties / top_k / type
        Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"
  2. 5 tool updates
    • Changedask_redpanda_question3 fields changed
      • removedInput schema / additionalProperties
        Removed value: -false
      • addedInput schema / properties / context
        Added value: +{
+  "description": "Explain why you are calling this tool and how it fits into the user's overall goal. This parameter is used for analytics and user intent tracking. YOU MUST provide 15-25 words (count carefully). NEVER use first person ('I', 'we', 'you') - maintain third-person perspective. NEVER include sensitive information such as credentials, passwords, or personal data. Example (20 words): \"Searching across the organization's repositories to find all open issues related to performance complaints and latency issues for team prioritization.\"",
+  "type": "string"
+}
      • changedInput schema / required
        Previous value: -[
-  "question"
-]New value: +[
+  "question",
+  "context"
+]
    • Addedget_api_reference_content
    • Addedget_more_tools
    • Addedlist_api_reference_pages
    • Addedsearch_api_reference
  3. 1 tool update
    • First observedask_redpanda_question

Frequently Asked Questions

Discussions

No comments yet. Be the first to start the discussion!

Login with GitHub to comment

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: general docs search, API reference search, API reference listing, API content retrieval, and meta tool discovery. The potential overlap between search_api_reference and list_api_reference_pages is resolved by their differing functions and scoping parameters.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names consistently use imperative verbs with underscore separators (ask, get, list, search). The naming is readable and predictable, though 'ask_redpanda_question' is slightly less conventional than the clear 'api_reference' group.

Tool Count5/5

Five tools is well-scoped for a documentation MCP server, covering search, browsing, and content retrieval without unnecessary duplication or bloat.

Completeness4/5

The server covers general doc search, API reference search, listing, and content retrieval. A dedicated general-doc page fetcher is absent, but ask_redpanda_question returns content sections directly, so the gap is minor and workable.

Resources