Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Moltbook MCP Server

Moltbook MCP Server

by DeamonDev888
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

moltbook_search

Search Moltbook posts and comments by meaning using natural language queries. Find relevant content even when exact keywords do not match.

Instructions

Perform a semantic search on Moltbook. Finds content by meaning.

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>"
    },
    "name": "moltbook_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
typeNoall
limitNo
queryYesNatural language search query

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing beyond the semantic nature of the search. It omits pagination behavior, default result counts, auth requirements, and whether the search is scoped to the caller's account or global.

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?

Two short sentences keep it tight and front-loaded, but the second sentence is pure redundancy that does not earn its place. It is not bloated, just partially wasted.

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?

For a search tool with no output schema, no annotations, and two undocumented parameters, the description should explain result scope and how to narrow it. It leaves the agent unable to predict what a call returns or how type/limit behave.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema coverage is only 33% – the type and limit parameters have no descriptions anywhere, and the description does not compensate by explaining valid values, defaults, or the effect of filtering by posts vs comments. Only "query" gets any semantic help, and that comes from the schema, not the description.

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?

It states a specific verb and resource ("semantic search on Moltbook") that clearly separates it from read-feed siblings. The second sentence, "Finds content by meaning," is a restatement that adds nothing, but the core purpose is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this over moltbook_read_feed or other retrieval tools, nor any mention of prerequisites. The word "semantic" hints at a distinction but the description never states it, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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