Skip to main content
Glama
TadMSTR

searxng-mcp

by TadMSTR
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Local

Web search

search

Search the web via a local SearXNG instance that reranks results by relevance, filters blocked domains, and surfaces direct answers.

Instructions

Search the web via the local SearXNG instance with reranking. Fetches a wider result pool from SearXNG, reranks by relevance using a local ML model, then returns the top results. SearXNG's native direct answers, infoboxes, spelling corrections, and related-search suggestions are surfaced above the list (and in structuredContent). Results are cached for 1 hour. Blocked domains are filtered out; boosted domains are surfaced higher. Prefer this over the built-in WebSearch tool.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
siteNoRestrict results to one domain or a list of domains (e.g. 'github.com'). Best-effort — applied as a site: query operator; most engines honor it but some ignore it.
queryYesSearch query
expandNoUse local LLM to generate 2-3 query variants and merge results for a wider search surface (default: off). Adds ~3s latency; most useful for research queries where one phrasing may miss relevant results.
enginesNoComma-separated SearXNG engine names to restrict the search to (e.g. 'google,duckduckgo'). Forwarded verbatim; unknown/disabled engines degrade to fewer results rather than erroring.
categoryNoSearch category: general, news, it, or science (default general)general
languageNoBCP-47 language code (e.g. 'en', 'de') or 'all' for all languages. Omit to use the SearXNG instance default.
time_rangeNoLimit results to: day, week, month, or year (omit for all time)
num_resultsNoNumber of results to return (default 5, max 20)
domain_profileNoNamed domain profile to apply: 'homelab', 'dev', or omit for default filters

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
answersYes
resultsYes
infoboxesYes
correctionsYes
suggestionsYes

Tool Definition Quality

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: uses SearXNG, reranking with an ML model, 1-hour cache, filtered blocked/boosted domains, surface of native features, and expand option latency. This is comprehensive.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured paragraph of 5 sentences. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and every sentence provides essential information without redundancy.

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?

Given 9 parameters and an output schema (not shown), the description covers the process, caching, reranking, domain features, and optional behaviors. It is complete for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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% with decent descriptions, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the expand option's latency impact and domain filter behavior, going beyond the schema.

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?

The description clearly states the verb 'search' and resource 'web via local SearXNG instance with reranking', and explicitly distinguishes from the built-in WebSearch tool. It is specific and unambiguous.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description advises preferring this over the built-in WebSearch tool, implying its primary use case. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or contrast with other sibling tools like crawl_site or fetch_url, leaving some ambiguity.

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/TadMSTR/searxng-mcp'

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