Veritula

Search ideas

search_ideas

Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches the ideas, criticisms and comments posted on Veritula, the most relevant first. Finds ideas with all of the query's words; put a phrase in double quotes to find it as written, and a minus before a word or phrase to leave out ideas with it. Without a query, lists the newest ideas. Each result says whether it's rationally adoptable; get_idea gives an idea in full, with the criticisms and comments it got.

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_ideas"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	20 results per page, starting at 1
`query`	No	The words to search for
`author`	No	Only ideas by this person, by their username
`adoptable`	No	Only ideas that are rationally adoptable (true), or only those that aren’t (false)
`discussion`	No	Only ideas in this discussion, by its id from other results
`older_versions`	No	Include versions that were revised since, which are left out otherwise

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 16, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent and non-destructive semantics, so the description only has to add context, and it does: relevance ranking, the default newest-first listing with no query, and the fact that results carry the rational-adoptability verdict. It says nothing about result volume or how the index is kept current, but for a safe read tool that is a minor gap.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the default behavior, then the query syntax, then the link to get_idea. Nothing is repeated and every sentence carries information the caller needs.

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 no output schema, the description carries the burden of explaining the results, and it does so at a high level (ordering and the adoptability verdict). It could add slightly more about which fields a result exposes, but it is complete enough to call the tool confidently.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description genuinely adds meaning to the query parameter: quotes force an exact phrase and a leading minus excludes a term. That is syntax the schema's 'The words to search for' does not convey, and for a search tool it is the detail that matters most.

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 ('Searches the ideas, criticisms and comments posted on Veritula') and adds relevance ordering. It also distinguishes the tool from get_idea by explaining that get_idea returns an idea in full, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

It states a clear fallback behavior ('Without a query, lists the newest ideas') and points to get_idea when full detail is needed. It never mentions search_discussions, though, so the boundary with that sibling is left to inference.

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

All Veritula 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?