Skip to main content
Glama

Moxie Docs

by io.github.Jackalope-Dev

moxie.search_docs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Keyword and semantic search across the connected repository's generated docs, conventions, documentation gaps, AI-context notes, and indexed code. Read-only; no side effects. Returns ranked matches in Markdown grouped into Documentation and Code sections, each with a title, snippet, and source paths. Use for open-ended lookups when you don't know which category holds the answer; when you do, the specific getters (get_conventions, get_doc_gaps, get_documentation_opportunities) are more direct. Omitting query returns recent context instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum matches to return (1-20, default 8).
queryNoSearch phrase or topic. Omit to return recent context for the repository.
repositoryNoThe target repository as "owner/name" (e.g. "acme/app"). Always pass this unless your token is scoped to a single repository. Matching is case-insensitive. If omitted when the token serves multiple repos, the call returns the list of repositories to choose from instead of an answer.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already provide readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive hints, so the bar is lower. The description adds valuable behavioral detail beyond annotations: Markdown output, Documentation/Code grouping, ranked matches with titles, snippets, and source paths, plus the recent-context fallback. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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?

Three dense, well-ordered sentences cover scope, output behavior, and usage guidance without fluff. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and keeps every sentence useful.

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?

Combined with complete schema coverage and strong annotations, the description supplies purpose, when-to-use guidance, output shape, and fallback behavior. It compensates well for the lack of an output schema, making the tool easy to select and invoke correctly.

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 the baseline is 3. The description reinforces parameter context, especially around query omission, but mostly repeats what the schema already states rather than adding materially new parameter-level semantics.

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?

Clearly identifies a keyword and semantic search tool across docs, conventions, gaps, AI-context notes, and indexed code. It distinguishes itself from sibling getters by positioning search as the open-ended option and naming more direct category-specific alternatives.

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?

Explicitly states when to use search vs. the specific getters, saying to use it for open-ended lookups when the target category is unknown. It also documents the omit-query behavior for returning recent context, giving clear invocation guidance.

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

All Moxie Docs toolsInspect
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
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clearly distinct purposes, but there is some overlap among the documentation-intelligence getters (get_doc_gaps vs get_documentation_opportunities vs get_doc_impact vs get_documentation_patterns). The descriptions do a good job differentiating them, and the scoping differences are explicit.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern: get_* for read-only context, propose_* for doc changes, plus list_docs, search_docs, and review_change. The naming is uniform and predictable.

Tool Count5/5

12 tools is well within the ideal 3-15 range and each tool covers a distinct aspect of the documentation workflow. The count feels comprehensive without being bloated.

Completeness4/5

The set covers the core lifecycle: discovering docs, gaps, opportunities, patterns, proposing updates/removals, and reviewing changes. A minor gap is the lack of a tool to fetch the full content of an existing doc (list_docs gives metadata, search_docs returns snippets), but this can be worked around.

Resources