Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bing_search

Search Bing web results for a query string and get normalized JSON with organic results, related queries, news, videos, and pagination. Use for general web search.

Instructions

Search Bing web results. Returns normalized Bing web search results for a query string, including organic results, optional context panel data, related queries, people-also-ask questions, news modules, video modules, and page-based pagination. Empty optional blocks are omitted from the JSON response. Locale defaults to country=us and lang=en-us. Results are fetched with a Chrome-impersonated request client and return 503 on a genuine transport failure or challenge page. Bing occasionally serves a well-formed page whose results share no significant term with the query; when every hedged attempt hits this, the response is still returned as 200 with data.low_confidence set to true (and the X-Low-Confidence header) instead of being withheld, so callers get Bing's real answer plus an honest signal to double-check it rather than nothing. Queries that use the site: operator (for example site:gov.hu) are not supported: Bing serves a bot-verification challenge for them, so they are rejected with 400 before any request is made. Use the DuckDuckGo (/api/v1/duckduckgo/search), Brave (/api/v1/brave/search), or Yahoo (/api/v1/yahoo-search/search) search endpoints for domain-restricted searches instead.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch query
langNoBing UI language; defaults to en-us
pageNo1-based page number; defaults to 1
countNoResults per page; defaults to 10, clamped to 1..50
countryNoTwo-letter country code; defaults to us

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.6.0
  2. Removedv1.6.0
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and handles it impressively. It discloses transport-failure/challenge behavior (503), the low-confidence fallback (200 with data.low_confidence and X-Low-Confidence header), empty-optional-block omission, locale defaults, and a Chrome-impersonated request client. These are exactly the non-obvious runtime traits an agent needs to interpret results correctly.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Although long, the description is dense and every sentence earns its place. It front-loads the core action and response contents, then moves through failure modes, low-confidence signaling, and routing guidance. No filler or duplication of schema fields.

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?

With no output schema, the description needs to communicate return shape and edge-case outcomes; it does both thoroughly. It covers response modules, empty-block omission, error codes, low-confidence behavior, unsupported operators, and alternative endpoints. An agent has everything needed to select and invoke this tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds meaningful value on top. It documents that site: queries in the q parameter are unsupported and pre-rejected with 400, and it confirms pagination behavior ('page-based pagination') plus locale defaults that mirror lang/country. This goes beyond the schema's terse parameter descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb-resource pair: 'Search Bing web results.' It goes beyond a one-liner by enumerating what the response contains (organic results, context panel, related queries, people-also-ask, news/video modules, pagination), making it unmistakable from siblings like bing_videos, bing_images, bing_news, and bing_suggest.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description explicitly tells the agent when NOT to use this tool: 'Queries that use the site: operator ... are rejected with 400 before any request is made.' It then names exact alternatives with paths: DuckDuckGo, Brave, or Yahoo for domain-restricted searches. This is concrete routing guidance, not just implied context.

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