ragic-mcp

ragic_search

Search through Ragic sheet data using full-text queries. Returns matching records from specified sheets.

Instructions

Full-text search a sheet (Ragic fts parameter).

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": {
      "path": "<path>",
      "sheet_index": "<sheet_index>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "ragic_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`path`	Yes
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes
`naming`	No	FNAME
`offset`	No
`sheet_index`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jun 25, 2026

TDQS

C2.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are present. The description only mentions the 'fts' parameter, giving minimal insight into behavioral traits like side effects, authorization needs, or performance implications. For a search tool, it is insufficient.

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?

The description is very concise, consisting of a single sentence. It is efficient with no wasted words, but could benefit from additional context without sacrificing brevity.

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?

Given the tool has 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain pagination (limit/offset), response format, or how the 'fts' parameter interacts with the query.

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?

The description adds no explanation for the six parameters beyond the hint about the 'fts' parameter. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to clarify the meaning or usage of parameters like 'path', 'sheet_index', 'limit', 'offset', or 'naming'.

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?

The description clearly states the tool performs full-text search on a sheet, referencing the Ragic 'fts' parameter. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'ragic_list_records' or 'ragic_get_record'.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks context for when full-text search is appropriate compared to list or filter operations.

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

Deploy Server