Universities

Search Universities

search_universities

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search universities worldwide by name and/or country using the Hipolabs API. Returns name, country, state/province, web pages, and email domains. At least one of name or country must be provided.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Alias for name.
`name`	No	University name or partial name (e.g., "Harvard", "MIT"). Accepts query, q, university, school as aliases.
`query`	No	Alias for name.
`school`	No	Alias for name.
`country`	No	Country name to filter by (e.g., "United States", "United Kingdom")
`university`	No	Alias for name.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`count`	Yes	Total number of universities found
`universities`	Yes	List of universities matching the search criteria

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed5 schema fields changedJun 2, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / name / description

Previous value: -"University name or partial name (e.g., \"Harvard\", \"MIT\")"New value: +"University name or partial name (e.g., \"Harvard\", \"MIT\"). Accepts query, q, university, school as aliases."

addedInput schema / properties / q

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / query

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / school

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / university

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Alias for name.",
+  "type": "string"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 8, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "count": {
+      "description": "Total number of universities found",
+      "type": "number"
+    },
+    "universities": {
+      "description": "List of universities matching the search criteria",
+      "items": {
+        "properties": {
+          "country": {
+            "description": "Country name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "country_code": {
+            "description": "Two-letter country code",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "domains": {
+            "description": "University domain names",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          },
+          "name": {
+            "description": "University name",
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "state_province": {
+            "description": "State or province name if applicable",
+            "type": [
+              "string",
+              "null"
+            ]
+          },
+          "web_pages": {
+            "description": "University web page URLs",
+            "items": {
+              "type": "string"
+            },
+            "type": "array"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "name",
+          "country",
+          "country_code",
+          "state_province",
+          "domains",
+          "web_pages"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "count",
+    "universities"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedMay 6, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "name": "Harvard"
+  },
+  {
+    "country": "United Kingdom",
+    "name": "Cambridge"
+  }
+]

First observedApr 14, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable context by listing the return fields (name, country, state/province, web pages, email domains) and the input requirement that at least one of name/country is needed, which is not enforceable from the schema alone. No contradiction with annotations.

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 deliver the core purpose, return data, and a key precondition. Each sentence earns its place, with no filler. The description is front-loaded with the verb.

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?

For a simple search tool with a rich output schema and complete annotation set, the description covers the essential behavior and a necessary input rule. It does not need to explain return values or safety, as those are captured in the output schema and annotations. The description is complete for the given complexity.

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?

The schema has 100% description coverage, with all six parameters documented including aliases. The description adds a cross-parameter constraint that at least one of name or country must be provided, which is not captured in the schema's required field list. This adds meaning beyond the individual property descriptions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific action ('Search universities worldwide') with a defined resource and an external API (Hipolabs). It mentions return fields, making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, though the university focus likely sets it apart.

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 provides a usage constraint ('At least one of name or country must be provided') but does not offer guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives. No exclusions or alternative tool suggestions are mentioned, so the usage context is implied rather than explicit.

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

All Universities tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.