Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@octri/mcp

@octri/mcp

by OctriDev
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Hybrid

search_docs

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search API documentation by natural language query to find endpoints or concepts. Returns matching results so you can locate the API details you need.

Instructions

Search the API documentation for an endpoint or concept

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": "search_docs"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoMaximum number of results to return (default 5)
queryYesNatural language search query
projectIdNoProject to read. Optional: defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv1.4.2
    • changedInput schema / properties / projectId / description
      Previous value: -"Project to read. Optional — defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project."New value: +"Project to read. Optional: defaults to the project this server was started with. Only pass it to target a different project."
  2. First observedv1.1.1

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only that the searchable domain is API documentation and that it matches endpoints or concepts; it says nothing about ranking, result scope, or how results differ from list_endpoints output.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted wording. It is efficient, though its brevity leaves no room for the routing guidance an agent would benefit from.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only, fully described 3-parameter tool with rich annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate but thin. It omits the main thing an agent would need: how this search relates to get_endpoint, list_endpoints, and get_guide.

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 coverage is 100%, and the schema documents query as a natural-language string, limit with a default of 5, and projectId's default project behavior. The description adds no further meaning about query formulation or reasonable limit values, so the 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?

"Search the API documentation for an endpoint or concept" names a specific verb (search) and resource (API documentation) plus what kinds of targets it matches. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_endpoint or list_endpoints, but the description never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer that search is for locating an unknown endpoint or concept before calling get_endpoint. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer search over get_guide, list_endpoints, or get_sdk_methods, and no exclusions.

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