Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-browser-search

mcp-browser-search

by HeiBai-king
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Local

web_search

Search the web through the user's logged-in browser on Baidu or Bing and return titles, URLs, and snippets for research, documentation lookup, and fact-checking.

Instructions

联网搜索（走用户已登录的真实浏览器，百度/Bing）。返回标题、URL、摘要。用于查资料、找文档、确认事实。

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": "web_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes搜索关键词
engineNo搜索引擎：baidu（默认）或 bing

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load; it usefully discloses that the search runs through the user's real logged-in browser session and which engines are used, which is non-obvious and affects trust/state. It says nothing about rate limits, CAPTCHA/login-expiry failures, latency, or result count, so the disclosure is partial.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the mechanism and return shape, then usage. No filler or repetition; every clause carries information an agent can act on.

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?

For a two-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers the engine mechanics and names the returned fields (title, URL, snippet), which is enough to call it correctly. Missing only minor operational details like result volume or fallback behavior on failure.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema; the mention of Baidu/Bing mirrors the engine enum values rather than adding syntax or default behavior beyond it. Baseline 3 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+resource ('联网搜索') with concrete scope: it uses the user's real logged-in browser and supports Baidu/Bing. An agent can distinguish it from web_read/web_open, which operate on already-known URLs, though the description never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

Gives positive use cases ('查资料、找文档、确认事实') which implies when to call it, but offers no explicit exclusion or routing rule such as 'if you already have a URL, use web_read instead' or what to do when a search fails.

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