Skip to main content
Glama

Related Servers

Alternatives to WebSearch-MCP

No user-submitted related servers found.

    Related Servers

    • F
      license
      C
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables web search capabilities through the Tavily API, allowing users to search the web for information using natural language queries. Demonstrates MCP (Model Context Protocol) server implementation with stdio transport mode.
      4
      -
    • A
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      A Grok-first multi-source search MCP for AI agents that integrates Grok, Tavily, AnySearch, and Firecrawl to provide unified search results, cross-verification, and web content fetching.
      3
      MIT
    • A
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      B
      maintenance
      Enables MCP clients to run unified web searches across multiple providers such as Exa, Serper, Tavily, Firecrawl, and Jina, fusing results with reciprocal rank fusion, and to extract readable content from public web pages, PDFs, and video pages as Markdown. Provider chains are configurable, failures are isolated per provider, and responses report attempted, succeeded, failed, and skipped channels with source tracing and honest warnings.
      MIT
    • F
      license
      Not graded
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables web search capabilities through the Tavily API, allowing users to search the web for information using natural language queries. Demonstrates MCP server implementation with stdio transport mode for integration with LLM applications.
      -
    • F
      license
      A
      quality
      D
      maintenance
      Enables web search capabilities through the Tavily API and serves as a demonstration platform for building custom MCP tools. Designed for educational purposes to showcase MCP server development and LangGraph integration.
      6
      -

    TDQS

    B3.1/5.0

    Scored across 12 tools

    Disambiguation4/5

    The plan_* tools all contribute to building a structured search plan, but each has a distinct role (e.g., adding a term vs. adding a sub-query vs. mapping to a tool). The only potential confusion is between plan_search_term and plan_sub_query, but the descriptions generally clarify the difference.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    All tool names use lowercase snake_case with consistent verb_noun or prefix patterns (plan_*, web_*, get_*, switch_*). No mixed conventions or vague verbs.

    Tool Count5/5

    12 tools is well within the typical 3-15 range and each tool serves a clear purpose within the web search and planning workflow. The count feels neither bloated nor sparse.

    Completeness4/5

    The tool set covers the core lifecycle of planning, executing, and retrieving web search results. Minor gaps exist, such as the lack of a 'view plan' or 'reset plan' tool, but agents can work around these limitations.

    Maintenance

    ActivitySlowing
    ResponsivenessNo issues