Pipeworx

Search MCP Directory

search_mcp_directory

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search thousands of MCP servers by use case (e.g., 'database', 'email', 'calendar'). Returns community and hosted servers. Use to find tools beyond Pipeworx.

Example tool call

This call uses example arguments supplied in the tool’s input schema.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "database"
    },
    "name": "search_mcp_directory"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max results (default 10)
`query`	Yes	Search query
`category`	No	Filter by category

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 19, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "query": {
-      "description": "Search query used",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "results": {
-      "description": "MCP server results",
-      "items": {
-        "properties": {
-          "category": {
-            "description": "Server category",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "description": {
-            "description": "Server description",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "name": {
-            "description": "Server name",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "quality_score": {
-            "description": "Quality rating 0-100",
-            "type": "number"
-          },
-          "title": {
-            "description": "Server title",
-            "type": "string"
-          },
-          "verified": {
-            "description": "Whether server is verified",
-            "type": "boolean"
-          }
-        },
-        "required": [
-          "name",
-          "title",
-          "description",
-          "category",
-          "quality_score",
-          "verified"
-        ],
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "type": "array"
-    },
-    "total": {
-      "description": "Total number of matching results",
-      "type": "number"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "query",
-    "total",
-    "results"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

Changed1 schema field changedMay 13, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "query": {
+      "description": "Search query used",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "results": {
+      "description": "MCP server results",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "category": {
+            "description": "Server category",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "description": {
+            "description": "Server description",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "Server name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "quality_score": {
+            "description": "Quality rating 0-100",
+            "type": "number"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "description": "Server title",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "verified": {
+            "description": "Whether server is verified",
+            "type": "boolean"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "name",
+          "title",
+          "description",
+          "category",
+          "quality_score",
+          "verified"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "total": {
+      "description": "Total number of matching results",
+      "type": "number"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "query",
+    "total",
+    "results"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "query": "database"
+  },
+  {
+    "category": "productivity",
+    "limit": 20,
+    "query": "email"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 22, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds that results include 'community and hosted servers,' which is useful result-type context, but gives no detail on pagination, ranking, or rate limits.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, followed by result scope and usage. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

For a read-only search tool with full schema coverage and clarifying annotations, the description is nearly complete; it even discloses result composition. It stops short of explaining result ordering or how to page beyond the limit parameter, but nothing essential for invocation is missing.

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 all three parameters (query, limit, category) are documented in the schema with defaults. The description's example queries ('database', 'email', 'calendar') and category hint add marginal color but no meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 (MCP servers/directory) with scope ('thousands of MCP servers by use case'). The clause 'Use to find tools beyond Pipeworx' distinguishes it from the Pipeworx-oriented siblings like ask_pipeworx and discover_tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Use to find tools beyond Pipeworx' gives a clear context for selection, signaling it covers the external ecosystem rather than the local catalog. It lacks explicit when-not conditions or named alternatives, but the usage context is clear.

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

All Pipeworx tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.