Skip to main content
Glama

Nuget

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Search

search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the NuGet .NET package registry by free text. Returns package id, description, authors, total downloads, and latest version for up to 1000 matches; optionally includes prerelease packages.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
skipNo0-based offset
takeNoMax results, 1-1000 (default 20)
queryYesFree-text query
prereleaseNoInclude prerelease packages (default false)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataNoArray of package results
totalHitsNoTotal number of matching packages

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "json serialization"
+  },
+  {
+    "prerelease": true,
+    "query": "logging framework",
+    "take": 50
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "description": "Search results from NuGet package registry",
+  "properties": {
+    "data": {
+      "description": "Array of package results",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "authors": {
+            "description": "List of package authors",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "description": "Package description",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "downloads": {
+            "description": "Download count",
+            "type": "integer"
+          },
+          "iconUrl": {
+            "description": "URL to package icon",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "id": {
+            "description": "Package identifier",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "licenseUrl": {
+            "description": "URL to package license",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "packageTypes": {
+            "description": "Types of packages",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "projectUrl": {
+            "description": "URL to project homepage",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "repositoryUrl": {
+            "description": "URL to source repository",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "tags": {
+            "description": "Package tags",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "verified": {
+            "description": "Whether package is verified",
+            "type": "boolean"
+          },
+          "version": {
+            "description": "Latest version of the package",
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "totalHits": {
+      "description": "Total number of matching packages",
+      "type": "integer"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. The description adds value by specifying the return limit (up to 1000 matches), the inclusion of prerelease packages as optional, and the list of returned fields. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences with no fluff. Every sentence provides essential information: the action, resource, return values, constraints, and optionality.

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?

Given the 4 parameters and existence of an output schema, the description covers core functionality, constraints (max 1000), and return fields. It does not explain pagination details (skip/take) but schema examples partially compensate.

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% with descriptions for all 4 parameters. The description adds context like 'up to 1000 matches' (relating to 'take') and 'optionally includes prerelease packages' (relating to 'prerelease'), enhancing meaning beyond the schema.

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 clearly states 'Search the NuGet .NET package registry by free text', specifying the resource (NuGet registry) and action (search by free text). It also lists return fields, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'search_within'.

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?

The description implies usage for free-text search but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like 'get_package' or 'list_versions'. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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

All Nuget 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

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Several tools are near-identical: ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_beta are explicitly the same function, ask_pipeworx_grounded is the same router with a different response mode, and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/polymarket_edge_tracker/polymarket_fill_risk all overlap on prediction-market edge detection. search vs search_within vs discover_tools also blur discovery boundaries. An agent would struggle to pick the right tool without reading every long description.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and individually readable, so there's no chaotic style mixing. However, the pattern is inconsistent: bare verbs (search, recall, forget, subscribe), verb_noun (get_package, resolve_entity, scan_dependency), noun phrases (latest_version, recent_alerts), and compound prefixes (pipeworx_*, polymarket_*). The server is named 'Nuget' but the vast majority of tools carry pipeworx_ or polymarket_ prefixes, making the namespace feel like a grab-bag.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is far too many for a server ostensibly named 'Nuget' — only ~5 tools relate to NuGet package lookup (search, get_package, list_versions, latest_version, scan_dependency), and even scan_dependency is npm-only. The remaining ~30 tools belong to an unrelated Pipeworx research/markets/memory platform. The count is inflated by redundant variants (ask_pipeworx trio, six polymarket tools) rather than distinct functionality.

Completeness2/5

Judged by the server's stated purpose (NuGet), the surface is thin and has dead ends: search and version metadata are covered, but there's no package owner/publisher info, no readme/description body fetch, no download stats beyond totals, and scan_dependency targets the wrong ecosystem (npm). Judged by the actual dominant domain (Pipeworx), coverage is excessive and sprawling. The tool set fails to deliver a coherent, complete surface for either apparent purpose.

Resources