Skip to main content
Glama
GongRzhe

Langflow Document Q&A Server

query_docs

Search documents using natural language questions to find specific information within your Langflow Q&A system.

Instructions

Query the document Q&A system with a prompt

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesThe query prompt to search for in the documents

Implementation Reference

  • src/index.ts:53-68 (registration)
    Registration of the 'query_docs' tool including its name, description, and input schema in the ListToolsRequestSchema handler.
        {
          name: 'query_docs',
          description: 'Query the document Q&A system with a prompt',
          inputSchema: {
            type: 'object',
            properties: {
              query: {
                type: 'string',
                description: 'The query prompt to search for in the documents',
              },
            },
            required: ['query'],
          },
        },
      ],
    }));
  • Input schema definition for the 'query_docs' tool.
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          query: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The query prompt to search for in the documents',
          },
        },
        required: ['query'],
      },
    },
  • Handler for CallToolRequestSchema that implements the 'query_docs' tool by checking the tool name and making an API call to the document Q&A endpoint with the query, returning the response text.
    this.server.setRequestHandler(CallToolRequestSchema, async (request) => {
      if (request.params.name !== 'query_docs') {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.MethodNotFound,
          `Unknown tool: ${request.params.name}`
        );
      }
    
      const { query } = request.params.arguments as { query: string };
    
      try {
        const response = await axios.post<QueryResponse>(
          this.apiEndpoint,
          {
            input_value: query,
            output_type: 'chat',
            input_type: 'chat',
            tweaks: {
              'ChatInput-Jrzyb': {},
              'ChatOutput-rzoZb': {},
              'ParseData-hzL7Q': {},
              'File-2Teuj': {},
              'Prompt-ktajI': {},
              'MistralModel-aLZcw': {}
            }
          },
          {
            headers: {
              'Content-Type': 'application/json',
            },
            params: {
              stream: false,
            },
          }
        );
    
        const result = response.data.outputs[0].outputs[0].results.message.text;
    
        return {
          content: [
            {
              type: 'text',
              text: result,
            },
          ],
        };
      } catch (error) {
        if (axios.isAxiosError(error)) {
          throw new McpError(
            ErrorCode.InternalError,
            `API request failed: ${error.message}`
          );
        }
        throw error;
      }
    });
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 burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions querying a 'document Q&A system', which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't specify behavioral traits like response format, error handling, rate limits, or authentication needs. The description is too minimal to provide adequate transparency for safe and effective use.

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 a single, clear sentence: 'Query the document Q&A system with a prompt'. It's front-loaded and efficiently conveys the core action without unnecessary words. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, such as by specifying the system's purpose or output type.

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's complexity (a query tool with no annotations and no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on what the tool returns, how results are formatted, any limitations, or error conditions. Without annotations or an output schema, the description should provide more context to help the agent understand the tool's behavior and outcomes, but it falls short.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'query' parameter documented as 'The query prompt to search for in the documents'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, as it doesn't elaborate on query syntax, examples, or constraints. With high schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose3/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states the tool 'Query the document Q&A system with a prompt', which provides a basic verb ('Query') and resource ('document Q&A system'), making the purpose somewhat clear. However, it's vague about what 'document Q&A system' entails and doesn't specify the scope or type of documents, leaving room for ambiguity. Without sibling tools, it doesn't need differentiation, but the purpose could be more specific.

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?

The description offers no guidance on when to use this tool, such as what types of queries it supports, prerequisites, or limitations. It simply states the action without context, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone. This lack of explicit or implied guidelines reduces its helpfulness in selecting the tool appropriately.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/GongRzhe/Langflow-DOC-QA-SERVER'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server