searchFull-text search across MDN content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | 1-based page | |
| size | No | 1-100 (default 10) | |
| query | Yes | ||
| locale | No | en-US (default) | fr | es | ja | zh-CN | … |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| metadata | No | Search metadata | |
| documents | No | Array of search result documents |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds 'MDN content' context but no additional behavioral traits beyond annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Very concise single sentence, front-loaded with key action and resource. Could include a bit more detail without being verbose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given output schema exists and annotations cover safety, the description is minimally adequate but lacks details on pagination, locale usage, and result structure.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 75%, so baseline is 3. Description does not add parameter-level information beyond the schema.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description states verb 'search' across specific resource 'MDN content', clearly distinguishing from sibling 'search_within' which likely searches within a subset.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_within' or other search-related tools. Context of use is implied but not explicit.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.