Google Search MCP Server

multi_site_search

Search multiple websites at once with a single query. Specify up to five sites and get results per site.

Instructions

Search across multiple specific websites simultaneously

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>",
      "sites": "<sites>"
    },
    "name": "multi_site_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	Search query
`sites`	Yes	Array of websites to search (e.g., ["github.com", "stackoverflow.com"])
`maxResults`	No	Max results per site
`fileType`	No	File type to search for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0May 30, 2026

TDQS

B3/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only adds the word 'simultaneously' beyond the basic purpose, but does not mention authentication needs, rate limits, result aggregation behavior, or any side effects.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise at 9 words, which is efficient but omits important context. It is not overly verbose, but at the expense of completeness and usage guidance.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no output schema and 4 parameters (one with enum), the description does not explain return format, error handling, or any constraints beyond basic purpose. It is insufficient for an agent to fully understand tool behavior.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the input schema already provides for each parameter (query, sites, maxResults, fileType).

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 'Search across multiple specific websites simultaneously' clearly states the action (search), the resource (multiple specific websites), and a key differentiator (simultaneously). It easily distinguishes this tool from siblings like google_search (general) and academic_search (academic).

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like google_search or news_monitor. There is no mention of when not to use it, prerequisites, or context where it excels.

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

Deploy Server