Skip to main content
Glama

Nevermined Catalog

Search services

search_services

Search the Nevermined Agent Services Catalog for paid services, ranked by ARD HYBRID relevance — semantic (meaning) matches merged with lexical (keyword) matches, most relevant first — falling back to pure lexical when the embedding provider is unavailable. A query is required; the other filters are optional. Returns matching listings (vendor, protocol, price label, endpoint). Only the first page is returned: the pageToken in the result cannot be passed back to this tool, so to see other matches narrow the query or filters, or raise pageSize (up to 100). Discovery only; no payment. To have the platform PICK (and optionally pay) the single best service for a need instead of choosing yourself, use route_by_intent.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoRestrict to services carrying this catalog tag (e.g. a protocol or domain keyword from a listing's `tags`). Combined with `category` it widens the match to either value rather than narrowing it.
queryYesWhat you need, in plain language. REQUIRED. Ranked semantically AND lexically (hybrid), most relevant first — a query describing the need ("translate documents to German") matches on meaning, not only exact words, and also keyword-matches title, descriptions and tags. Falls back to keyword-only ranking when the embedding provider is unavailable.
categoryNoRestrict to services carrying this catalog tag — it filters on tags exactly like `tag`. The category names `list_categories` returns are not stored as tags, so passing one here matches nothing; put a category name in `query` instead. Given together, `category` and `tag` match a service carrying either one.
pageSizeNoPage size, 1–100 (a size of 0 is meaningless and is rejected).
protocolNoRestrict to a payment protocol. Only x402 and mpp are payable via the Router.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the hybrid-then-lexical fallback when embeddings are unavailable, the included return fields, and the important limitation that pageToken cannot be passed back so only the first page is reachable.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action and ranking behavior, and every sentence carries substantive information. It is somewhat long and repeats a few schema-level facts (pageSize cap), but nothing is filler.

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?

Despite having no output schema, the description names the returned fields and the pagination constraint, and covers auth/payment expectations. An agent has everything needed to call it 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 schema already documents all five parameters thoroughly, including the tag/category widening interaction and the protocol enum. The description's parameter notes (query required, pageSize up to 100) largely restate the schema, so the 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?

States a specific verb (Search) and resource (Nevermined Agent Services Catalog) and specifies the ranking behavior (hybrid semantic+lexical, relevance-ordered). It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling route_by_intent, which handles the opposite selection mode.

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?

Clearly frames this as discovery-only with no payment, and names the alternative route_by_intent for when the platform should pick/pay for a service instead. When-to-use versus alternatives is explicit.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources