DeepSeek Search MCP

deepseek_search

Search the web for a query and return ranked, structured results; use site, language, and date filters to narrow sources and optionally fetch page content.

Instructions

Search the web for a query and return a ranked list of structured results.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`count`	No	The number of results to return, between 1 and 50. Defaults to 10.
`query`	Yes	The search query. Supports operators such as `site:`, `-site:`, and quoted phrases. Must contain 1 to 128 Unicode characters and cannot be all whitespace. The query is forwarded with its search syntax intact. The examples below combine operators with a search term; you can combine multiple operators in one query. \| Operator \| Example \| Description \| \| --- \| --- \| --- \| \| `site:` \| `DeepSeek site:github.com` \| Restrict results to the given site, and to target multiple sites, separate the `site:` clauses with spaces and join them with `OR`, for example `DeepSeek site:github.com OR site:huggingface.co.` \| \| `-site:` \| `DeepSeek -site:example.com` \| Exclude the given site, and separate multiple sites with spaces. \| \| `-` \| `DeepSeek -advertisement` \| Exclude pages containing the term, and separate multiple terms with spaces. \| \| `-"..."` \| `DeepSeek -"release notes"` \| Exclude pages containing the exact phrase, which can contain spaces, and separate multiple phrases with spaces. \| \| `"..."` \| `DeepSeek "exact phrase"` \| Match an exact phrase, and separate multiple phrases with spaces. \| \| `lang:` \| `DeepSeek lang:zh,en` \| Restrict results to the given language codes, separating multiple codes with commas, for example `lang:zh,en.` \| \| `after:` \| `DeepSeek after:2025` or `DeepSeek after:2025-01-01` \| Restrict results to pages published after a date. \| \| `before:` \| `DeepSeek before:2026` or `DeepSeek before:2026-06-01` \| Restrict results to pages published before a date. \|
`localization`	No	An optional IP address used to localize search results. Defaults to an empty string.
`need_content`	No	Whether to return page `content` in content. Defaults to `false`; when `false`, `content` is always an empty string.
`ori_question`	No	The user's original question that triggered the search, between 1 and 128 characters. Providing it can improve query understanding. `null` is treated as not provided.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.0Oct 17, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and delivers little beyond the one-line summary. It does not disclose rate limits, auth requirements, result recency/freshness behavior, or how 'content' varies with need_content — all of which materially affect invocation.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though the terseness leaves no room for the usage or behavioral context an agent would benefit from.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source for return-value behavior and operational constraints — and 'ranked list of structured results' does not say what fields come back or how content is populated. For a 5-parameter web-search tool, that leaves key context unaddressed.

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 the schema already documents query operators, count bounds/default, localization, need_content, and ori_question in detail. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline of 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the web') plus the return shape ('ranked list of structured results'). There are no sibling tools to differentiate from, so the lack of contrastive framing is not a gap.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist. Since it is the only tool listed, alternatives are moot, but the description also omits any prerequisite or context (e.g., freshness limits, whether it is a live web search vs. cached index).

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools

deepseek_searchC