SearchPipe
Server Details
Real-time web search for AI agents: ranked results, source URLs, and optional AI answers.
- Status
- Healthy
- Uptime
- 94.4% over 22 days
- Last Tested
- Transport
- Streamable HTTP · MCP 2025-11-25
- URL
- Repository
- SearchPipe/searchpipe-mcp
- GitHub Stars
- 0
TDQS
Scored across 1 tool
There is only one tool, so there is no possibility of selecting the wrong one; its purpose (run an AI-powered web search) is unambiguous. No overlap or boundary confusion exists in this set.
The single name `searchpipe_search` is clear snake_case with the server prefix plus the action, which is a predictable verb_noun-style convention. However, a one-tool set provides no evidence of a sustained pattern, so it cannot be a perfect 5.
The server exposes one wrapper around a single commercial search pipeline, so the count is defensible for the narrow purpose. Still, one tool is thin for anything an agent might want to manage on this service (e.g. credits or usage), making it borderline under-scoped.
The core domain operation (search with answer/reranking) is covered, and errors are surfaced via tool errors. But the description references authentication, credit charging, and usage logging with no tool to check credit balance, usage, or key validity, leaving agents without recovery paths when a call fails.
Available Tools
1 toolsearchpipe_searchAInspect
Run an AI-powered web search for a query: multi-engine retrieval → page fetching → LLM reranking → optional AI answer.
Uses the same commercial pipeline as the HTTP POST /search endpoint: authentication → rate limiting → input moderation → credit charge → search → output moderation + AI-generated marker → refund on failure → usage logging. Credits are charged per call.
api_key: an API key starting with sp-. It may also be provided through the SEARCHPIPE_API_KEY
environment variable (the parameter takes precedence).
Returns Tavily-style structured results (query / answer / results[]).
Returns a tool error on authentication failure, insufficient credits, content violation, or retrieval failure.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | ||
| api_key | No | ||
| max_results | No | ||
| include_answer | No | ||
| include_raw_content | No |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | |
| answer | No | LLM-generated answer (optional) |
| results | Yes | |
| ai_generated | No | Whether the response contains LLM-generated content |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so thoroughly: it discloses the commercial pipeline, authentication, rate limiting, moderation, credit charging, refund on failure, usage logging, and specific tool error conditions. This is rich operational transparency.
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?
The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and then layers in necessary behavioral details. It is somewhat long but remains information-dense, with only minor repetition between the initial pipeline summary and the commercial pipeline breakdown.
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?
The tool has no annotations and low schema description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does an excellent job on behavior, errors, and authentication, but it leaves several input parameters unexplained, making it only partially complete for safe invocation.
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 0% and the description only documents api_key semantics (prefix, environment variable, precedence). It does not explain max_results, include_answer, or include_raw_content, leaving most parameters without semantic guidance.
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?
The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Run an AI-powered web search for a query.' It clearly describes the tool's function and even outlines the internal pipeline, leaving no ambiguity about what it does.
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?
Usage is implied by the name and the mention of an AI-powered web search, but the description does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or when not to use it. It provides pipeline context rather than decision guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Tool Schema Changelog
Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
1 tool update
- Changed
searchpipe_search11 fields changed- added
Output schema / properties / ai_generated / titleAdded value: +"Ai Generated" - added
Output schema / properties / answer / titleAdded value: +"Answer" - added
Output schema / properties / query / titleAdded value: +"Query" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / properties / content / titleAdded value: +"Content" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / properties / raw_content / titleAdded value: +"Raw Content" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / properties / score / titleAdded value: +"Score" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / properties / title / titleAdded value: +"Title" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / properties / url / titleAdded value: +"Url" - added
Output schema / properties / results / items / titleAdded value: +"SearchResult" - added
Output schema / properties / results / titleAdded value: +"Results" - added
Output schema / titleAdded value: +"SearchResponse"
2 tool updates
- Removed
ai_search_search - Added
searchpipe_search
1 tool update
- First observed
ai_search_search
Related MCP Connectors
The best web search for your AI Agent
Agent-native search engine with live web research optimized for AI agents.
LLM-ready web search + instant answers + URL-to-clean-text fetch for agents and RAG.
Web search for AI agents. Ranked results with page passages already extracted, plus URL to markdown.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceEnables AI agents to perform live web searches with ranked results and extracted page passages, plus clean markdown extraction of any URL.MIT

AnySearchofficial
AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceUnified real-time search engine skill for AI agents.1,858Apache 2.0- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceEnables AI agents to perform LLM-optimized web searches, retrieve recent news articles with full text, and extract clean readable content from URLs. It returns synthesized answers, ranked cited sources, and page text suitable for grounding RAG workflows.106 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides web search and content extraction for AI agents.MIT
Glama MCP Gateway
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.