Univs

Search study programmes

search_programs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search published Univs.com study programmes by name, country, degree level, teaching language and scholarship availability. Returns tuition, duration, intakes, the programme page URL and whether students can apply through Univs.

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": "search_programs"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Result page (12 results per page).
`query`	No	Words in the programme name, e.g. "medicine", "computer science", "MBA".
`degree`	No	Degree level slug: bachelor, master, doctorate, diploma, certificate, foundation.
`country`	No	Country slug, e.g. "georgia" (see list_countries). Comma-separate up to 5.
`language`	No	Teaching language, e.g. "English".
`scholarship`	No	Only programmes with a listed scholarship.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No
`error`	No	Present only when the search failed.
`pages`	No
`query`	No	Filters that were applied.
`total`	No	Number of matching programmes.
`notice`	No
`results`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful scope detail the annotations do not: only *published* programmes are returned, and results carry tuition, duration, intakes, a page URL and an apply-through-Univs flag.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the search scope and followed by the return payload; nothing is redundant or padded.

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?

With an output schema present, the description does not need to enumerate return fields, yet it still gives a useful payload summary, and annotations cover safety. Minor gaps remain around result ordering and whether zero-parameter calls return everything, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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%, including the 12-results-per-page pagination and the 'comma-separate up to 5' constraint on country, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only restates which facets are filterable without adding syntax, defaults or matching behaviour (e.g. how 'query' is matched).

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 a specific verb and resource ('Search published Univs.com study programmes') and enumerates the five filterable facets, so an agent can immediately tell this apart from search_agencies and search_institutes by resource type alone.

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?

Usage is implied by the search framing and the enumerated filters, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this tool over the sibling search tools, nor any exclusion or prerequisite guidance. The one cross-reference that would help ('see list_countries') lives 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 Univs 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.

Resources

Need Help?