Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

baidu_search

Search Baidu web results by query and page to retrieve structured cards with titles, URLs, snippets, publishers, dates, and result types for web, video, or Baike entries.

Instructions

Search Baidu web results. Returns Baidu result cards for a query: title, destination URL, snippet, publisher, and date, with page-based pagination. Each result's type is web (standard pages), video (video cards), or baike (Baidu Baike encyclopedia entries); answer widgets such as weather, entity panels, and recommendation lists are not returned. Baidu challenges a portion of requests with a security verification page; the service retries and returns 503 if every attempt is challenged, so callers should retry on 503.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch query
pageNo1-based result page; defaults to 1, maximum 10

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.9

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the return fields, the three result `type` values, what is excluded (answer widgets), and a concrete failure mode (503 when all retries are challenged, with a retry recommendation). It stops short of auth or rate-limit detail, but the error-handling disclosure is unusually valuable.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return shape, then error handling -- each earns its place. Slightly dense in the second sentence but no filler.

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?

There is no output schema, yet the description compensates by enumerating the returned card fields and the result `type` enum, plus the failure mode. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool is missing.

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%, and the schema already documents `q` and the 1-based `page` with its default and max. The description's 'page-based pagination' adds little beyond that, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Search Baidu web results') and immediately names the source (Baidu), which cleanly separates it from the large family of sibling search tools like bing_search, duckduckgo_search, and yahoo_search. An agent can identify it without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied (run a query, paginate with page), and it helpfully sets expectations about what is not returned. But it never states when to prefer Baidu over the many other search siblings, nor any exclusions beyond the widget note. Adequate context, no explicit routing guidance.

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