reed-mcp
This server provides read-only access to a local private document corpus via four tools, keeping all data on-device. It supports:
reed_search: Query the index to retrieve ranked passage chunks with filenames, pages, scores, and excerpts. It also reports
sufficient_evidenceto help decide whether to answer. Designed for the host model to use the evidence for its own cited answer.reed_ask: Send a question to reed's local language model to generate a fully-local answer with
[n]citation markers, a citation audit, and source metadata.reed_list_documents: List all indexed documents (paginated) with their IDs, names, ingestion status (ready, queued, parsing, indexing), metadata, and chunk/page counts.
reed_get_document: Get detailed status and metadata for a single document by ID, such as ingestion progress or errors.
All tools are read-only (no document modification) and operate locally, ensuring privacy and auditable citations for any generated answers.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@reed-mcpsearch my research notes for the 2024 results"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
reed-mcp
Your assistant reads your private documents. Nothing leaves the machine.
An MCP server that puts reed — a local-first RAG service with audited citations — behind four read-only tools, so any MCP host can answer from your own documents.
The problem
Connecting an assistant to your documents normally means uploading them somewhere. For a law firm, a clinic or anyone under GDPR, that is not a deployment detail — it is the reason the project does not happen.
The pieces to avoid it already exist: local models, local vector stores, RAG services that run on a laptop. What was missing is the join. An assistant that can use a local index needs a tool interface, and a RAG service that answers in prose is the wrong shape — the host already has a model, and a better one. What it needs is evidence.
Related MCP server: rag-retriever-mcp
Constraints
Nothing leaves the machine. The host spawns this server over stdio; the server talks to reed over loopback. There is no telemetry, no analytics and no third-party host in the request path.
The host's model writes the answer. reed-mcp returns ranked passages with filenames, pages and scores. Attribution is the point: an answer nobody can check is worse than no answer.
Read-only. No upload, no replace, no delete. A tool that cannot destroy anything needs no confirmation dialog and no trust.
Consumer hardware. A laptop, a 4B model, no GPU cluster.
Architecture
flowchart LR
H["MCP host<br/>(Claude Desktop, Claude Code)"] -->|stdio| M["reed-mcp"]
M -->|"HTTP, loopback"| R["reed"]
R --> Q[("Qdrant<br/>hybrid index")]
R --> O["Ollama<br/>local models"]
M -.->|"evidence + citations"| HTwo decisions carry the design.
A separate process, not a reed subcommand. reed is single-node by design:
one process per registry and active index. Importing it as a library while
reed serve is running is exactly what that model forbids, so reed-mcp is a
client, and reed's HTTP surface is the contract between them.
search before ask. reed_search returns evidence and stops; the host's
model writes the answer and cites it. reed_ask runs reed's own local model
instead, which costs seconds rather than milliseconds — worth it when a fully
local generation is the requirement, wasteful when the host was going to write
the answer anyway. This is why reed grew
POST /v1/search: retrieval
without generation did not exist, and without it every lookup paid for an answer
the caller would discard.
Tools
Tool | Returns |
| Ranked passages: filename, page, section, score, excerpt — plus reed's evidence-threshold verdict ( |
| reed's own answer with |
| The corpus and each document's ingestion status. |
| One document's status and metadata. |
Seeing it work
A real Claude Code session, against a local reed holding one document:
$ claude -p "Using the reed tools, what is the expense pre-approval threshold
and how long do I have to submit receipts? Cite the document."
From `handbook.md` — Acme Remote Work Handbook, "Expenses" section:
- Pre-approval threshold: expenses above €75 require pre-approval from your
team lead.
- Receipts: must be submitted within 30 days of purchase.
Also in that section: reimbursement is processed on the 15th of the following
month.The model wrote that from what reed_search handed it — evidence, not prose:
{
"sufficient_evidence": true,
"min_evidence_score": 0.83,
"sources": [
{
"n": 1,
"filename": "handbook.md",
"section": "Acme Remote Work Handbook",
"score": 1.0,
"excerpt": "## Expenses\n\nExpenses above 75 euros require pre-approval from your team lead. Receipts must…"
}
]
}Results
Measured end to end — a real MCP session over stdio, a real reed, a real index — on an Apple M5 (32 GB) running reed 0.5.1 with EmbeddingGemma and qwen3.5:4b through Ollama. 30 searches and 5 asks after a warm-up call:
Operation | p50 | p95 |
| 159 ms | 252 ms |
| 4.8 s | — |
The gap is the whole argument for search: retrieval is thirty times cheaper
than generation, and the host already has a model.
On egress, the honest claim is architectural rather than measured: the only host
reed-mcp opens a connection to is REED_MCP_URL, and its runtime dependencies
are httpx and the MCP SDK. Independent verification is a job for a tool built
for it — that measurement will be added when
egress-audit exists rather than asserted here.
Run it
You need a running reed 0.5.0 or newer
(/v1/search first shipped there; 0.5.1+ recommended) and
uv. If you would rather bring up reed with
Ollama and Qdrant in one command,
private-ai-stack does that and
binds reed exactly where this server looks for it.
Claude Code:
claude mcp add reed -- uvx --from git+https://github.com/Ulzuhan/reed-mcp@v0.1.0 reed-mcpClaude Desktop, in claude_desktop_config.json:
{
"mcpServers": {
"reed": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": ["--from", "git+https://github.com/Ulzuhan/reed-mcp@v0.1.0", "reed-mcp"]
}
}
}Then ask your assistant something your documents answer. It will search, quote and cite.
Installing from the repository rather than from PyPI is deliberate: reed is
distributed the same way, and a tool whose entire premise is that nothing leaves
your machine should not ask you to trust one more package index than it has to.
The @v0.1.0 above pins the release; drop it to track main, or point it at
any tag or commit.
Configuration
Environment variables only — never tool arguments, so nothing sensitive can be elicited through the tool channel:
Variable | Default | Meaning |
|
| Where reed listens |
| empty | Sent as |
|
| Per-request timeout |
|
| Longer excerpts are truncated and marked |
Security model
Retrieved text is data, not instructions. Excerpts reach the host's model as quoted document content, and every tool description says so. reed audits citations on its side. Neither can semantically sanitise a document: index what you trust, and treat a corpus anyone can write to as untrusted input.
Credentials never touch the tool channel. They arrive through the process environment and are never logged.
Nothing here can modify your corpus. All four tools are annotated read-only, and the server implements no write path.
Development
uv sync
uv run pytest
uv run ruff check . && uv run mypyThe unit suite is hermetic — reed is stubbed at the HTTP layer. The end-to-end suite is not, and that is the point: it launches this package the way a host does and drives it against a real reed. CI runs it against the published reed image, pinned by digest.
REED_MCP_E2E_URL=http://localhost:8000 uv run pytest e2eMocks proved the wiring and missed the bug that mattered — a client bound to an event loop that had already closed, which broke every tool call in every real host while the unit suite stayed green. The e2e suite exists because of it.
License
Apache-2.0.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseCqualityCmaintenanceProvides RAG tools with local vector retrieval and web fallback using Firecrawl, enabling document ingestion and querying through MCP stdio transport.3
- FlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceA local-first document retrieval engine that mounts as an MCP tool for agents to index files, search for relevant passages, and let the agent's own LLM answer.4
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceProvides read-only, citation-backed semantic search and retrieval-augmented generation over enterprise documents via standardized MCP tools, with local embeddings for privacy.

dryad-rag-mcpofficial
AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceExposes a RAG document-search API as MCP tools (rag_health, rag_ingest, rag_query), enabling agents to index and search markdown documents with cited results through natural language.3MIT
Related MCP Connectors
Agentic search over your Dewey document collections from any MCP-compatible client.
Agent-native MCP server over the public saagarpatel.dev corpus. Read-only, stateless.
Turn a GitHub repo or docs site into agent-ready context: pack it or search it, over MCP.
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/Ulzuhan/reed-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server