Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bing_suggest

Generate Bing search query suggestions from a prefix, returning autosuggest completions with optional entity cards and country/language settings.

Instructions

Suggest Bing search queries. Returns Bing autosuggest query completions for a query prefix. Locale defaults to country=us and lang=en-us. Suggestions are fetched from public Bing suggest endpoints and trimmed to the requested count. rich=true adds entity cards (name, description, image) where Bing shows them.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch query prefix
langNoBing UI language; defaults to en-us
richNoAdd entity name, description, and image to suggestions Bing resolves to a known entity; defaults to false
countNoSuggestions to return; defaults to 10, clamped to 1..12
countryNoTwo-letter country code; defaults to us

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.17.9
    • addedInput schema / properties / rich
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Add entity name, description, and image to suggestions Bing resolves to a known entity; defaults to false",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Addedv1.6.0
  3. Removedv1.6.0
  4. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it discloses the data source (public Bing suggest endpoints, implying no auth), the default locale (country=us, lang=en-us), that output is trimmed to the requested count, and what rich=true adds. It omits rate limits and error behavior, but the core behavioral profile is covered.

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?

Four tight sentences with no filler; the primary purpose and return format are front-loaded before the locale and rich-mode details. Slightly list-like but nothing wasted.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must describe return values, and it does: suggestion completions for a prefix, count trimming, and the entity-card shape when rich=true. What a caller needs to invoke it correctly is present, with only edge-case behavior (empty prefix, errors) left 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 q, lang, rich, count, and country including defaults and the 1..12 clamp. The description mostly restates these (locale defaults, entity cards) rather than adding new semantics, so the baseline 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 ('Suggest Bing search queries') and immediately clarifies the return: autosuggest completions for a query prefix, which implicitly separates it from bing_search. It does not name any sibling explicitly, so an agent must infer the routing rather than being told it.

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 by 'for a query prefix' — the correct way to use it is clear — but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not guidance and no mention of alternatives such as bing_search or other suggest endpoints. Adequate but inferential.

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