Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Pullwire

by dev.pullwire
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Bing & DuckDuckGo SERP API

serp
Read-only

Search results from Bing and DuckDuckGo as structured JSON: organic results with position, title, URL and snippet, Bing ads and related searches, result count, pagination, country and language. No browser, no Google. Costs 1 credit per result; failed items are free.

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": {
      "queries": "<queries>"
    },
    "name": "serp"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
engineNoBing returns organic results, ads, related searches and the result count. DuckDuckGo returns organic results; its related searches come from DuckDuckGo’s own query suggestions and it shows no ads on this route.bing
countryNoTwo-letter country code for the result market, e.g. "us", "gb", "de". Empty: the engine picks the market (Bing by location, DuckDuckGo "All regions").
queriesYesOne search per entry, exactly as you would type it into the search box. Operators like site: work.
languageNoInterface and result language, e.g. "en", "de", "fr". For DuckDuckGo it picks between a country’s regions (e.g. Canada + fr).
maxResultsNoStop after this many result pages in total across all queries. Empty: no extra cap.
maxPagesPerQueryNoHow many result pages to fetch for each query (about 10 organic results per page).
includeRelatedSearchesNoInclude related searches. Free on Bing (same page); one extra request per query on DuckDuckGo.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/openWorld/non-destructive, so the description's job is to add operational context — and it does, with a credit-cost model ('1 credit per result; failed items are free') and the no-browser rendering constraint. It stops short of disclosing rate limits, concurrency, or failure modes across a 100-query batch.

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 dense sentences, front-loaded with what is returned, then the cost/limitation caveat. The long field enumeration is justified because there is no output schema, though the colon-heavy list reads more like spec text than guidance.

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 return-shape burden and does so adequately, listing the result fields and the Bing-vs-DuckDuckGo output differences are covered by the schema. For a 7-parameter, open-world batch search tool it is close to complete; only batching behavior and error handling are unaddressed.

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 (engine, country, language, maxResults, maxPagesPerQuery, includeRelatedSearches) is already documented in detail. The description only echoes 'result count, pagination, country and language' without adding format or edge-case meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource (search results from Bing and DuckDuckGo) and enumerates the returned fields — organic results with position, title, URL, snippet, ads, related searches, result count, pagination. 'No browser, no Google' further bounds the scope so an agent can tell exactly what this tool is and is not.

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 only implied: it is clearly a web-search tool, and 'no browser' signals it won't render JS-heavy pages, which is a useful negative. But it never states when to prefer this over the sibling 'scrape' tool or when to pick Bing vs DuckDuckGo (that lives only in the schema). No explicit exclusions or prerequisites in the description itself.

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

All Pullwire toolsInspect
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