Skip to main content
Glama
MeruLocal

raivatedu-mcp-server

by MeruLocal
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

Search RaivatEdu Content

raivatedu_search_content
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the public RaivatEdu website by keyword or phrase to find relevant pages and matching snippets, then drill into results with page content retrieval.

Instructions

Search the public RaivatEdu website for a keyword or phrase and return the most relevant pages with matching snippets.

There is no public search API on the site, so this tool performs a client-side search: it fetches a curated set of content-rich pages for the market, scores them against your query (title, headings, description and body), and returns the best matches. Use it to answer "where does the site talk about X?" questions, then drill in with raivatedu_get_page_content.

Args:

  • query (string, required): 2–200 chars; words are matched case-insensitively.

  • market (optional): locale to search (in, us, gb, ca, au, nz, ie, sg, ae, za); defaults to the configured market.

  • limit (number): max results, 1–20 (default 5).

  • response_format ('markdown' | 'json'): output format (default markdown).

Returns JSON shape: { "query": string, "market": string, "pages_searched": number, "count": number, "results": [ { "title", "url", "type", "score": number, "snippet": string } ] }

Notes:

  • Searches ~28 marketing/content pages per market; it does not crawl the entire site.

  • Returns an empty results array (not an error) when nothing matches.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (1–20).
queryYesKeyword or phrase to search for.
marketNoMarket/locale segment. One of: in, us, gb, ca, au, nz, ie, sg, ae, za. Defaults to the server's configured market (initially 'in' for India).
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for a human-readable summary (default) or 'json' for the full structured object.markdown

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only/idempotent/non-destructive, and the description adds substantial beyond that: no public search API exists, it is a client-side fetch over ~28 curated pages rather than a full crawl, and no-match returns an empty array instead of an error. These are exactly the operational caveats an agent needs.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose and mechanism, then args, returns and notes in a scannable order. The args section largely restates the schema, which is mild redundancy, but the returns block earns its space since there is no output schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description supplies the full return shape, including score and snippet fields, plus the empty-results behavior and the bounded crawl scope. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3; the description adds a genuinely new semantic detail in that words are matched case-insensitively and the search spans title, headings, description and body. The remaining arg listings duplicate the schema, so it does not earn a 5.

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

Purpose5/5

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

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the public RaivatEdu website') plus what is returned ('most relevant pages with matching snippets'). It also distinguishes itself from raivatedu_get_page_content by framing this as the discovery step before drilling in.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly names the use case ('where does the site talk about X?') and names the follow-up tool raivatedu_get_page_content, so an agent knows both when to use it and what to do next. The alternative for full page text is effectively routed to the sibling.

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