Skip to main content
Glama

qdrant_search

Perform semantic vector search across code and documentation to find similar snippets or symbols, with optional filters for language, chunk type, and symbol name.

Instructions

Search for similar code or documentation using semantic search.

This tool performs vector search in Qdrant to find relevant code snippets
or documentation based on semantic similarity to the query.

Use optional filters to narrow down results:
- chunk_type: Find only specific code constructs (function_def, class_def, etc.)
- symbol_name: Find exact symbol by name (e.g., 'get_user', 'MyClass')
- language: Find only files of a specific language

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>",
      "collection": "<collection>"
    },
    "name": "qdrant_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results
queryYesSearch query text
languageNoFilter by programming language (e.g., 'python', 'go', 'javascript')
chunk_typeNoFilter by chunk type (e.g., 'function_def', 'class_def', 'document')
collectionYesCollection name to search in (use project-specific name to isolate data)
symbol_nameNoFilter by exact symbol name (function, class, variable name)
score_thresholdNoMinimum score threshold

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.3.3

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it omits key traits: that this is a read-only, non-mutating operation (only inferable from the word "search"), what happens if the collection is missing, or how the default 0.7 score_threshold affects result volume. It discloses the retrieval mechanism (vector similarity) but little else about runtime behavior.

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 opening sentence is front-loaded and useful, and the filter bullets are scannable. However, the second paragraph ("This tool performs vector search in Qdrant to find relevant code snippets or documentation based on semantic similarity") is a near-verbatim restatement of the first sentence and earns no place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and all seven parameters are covered in the schema. The description conveys purpose, mechanism, and the main filter options, leaving only minor gaps around collection prerequisites and threshold tuning.

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 every parameter, including limit, collection, and score_threshold, is already documented. The description's filter bullets largely restate chunk_type, symbol_name, and language semantics already present in the schema, and it never explains the impact of collection scoping or the threshold, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

"Search for similar code or documentation using semantic search" names a specific verb (search) and resource (code/docs) plus the mechanism (vector similarity in Qdrant). It is clearly distinct in spirit from the management/indexing siblings, but it never explicitly contrasts itself with any named alternative, so it stops short of a 5.

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 gives implied usage guidance via the filter list (e.g., use chunk_type to find specific constructs, symbol_name for exact lookups), which helps an agent choose the right call shape. It never states when to prefer this tool over anything else, nor any precondition such as the collection needing to exist or be indexed.

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