AllSearch MCP

Web search

search

Read-onlyIdempotent

Query the public web for citations, coverage checks (site, comments, recency, cross-language), and forum threads, returning a result_id for read_result.

Instructions

Search the public web. Returns citations, a coverage check against what the query asked for (site, comments, recency, cross-language), forum threads read through their APIs, and a result_id for read_result.

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"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`mode`	No		auto
`depth`	No	fast < balanced < verify < deep in cost and coverage	balanced
`fresh`	No	Bypass caches and repeat detection
`query`	Yes	What to find. Name a site (e.g. V2EX, Hacker News) to restrict to it.
`vertical`	No
`max_results`	No
`exclude_domains`	No
`include_domains`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed7 schema fields changedv0.3.0Oct 18, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / depth / description
```
Added value: +"fast < balanced < verify < deep in cost and coverage"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / fresh / description
```
Added value: +"Bypass caches and repeat detection"
```
- addedInput schema / properties / max_results / maximum
```
Added value: +20
```
- addedInput schema / properties / max_results / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```
- addedInput schema / properties / query / description
```
Added value: +"What to find. Name a site (e.g. V2EX, Hacker News) to restrict to it."
```
- addedInput schema / properties / query / maxLength
```
Added value: +2000
```
- addedInput schema / properties / query / minLength
```
Added value: +1
```
First observedv0.1.0Aug 11, 2026

TDQS

B3.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine context the annotations don't carry: a coverage check against query facets (site, comments, recency, cross-language) and the fact that forum threads are read through their APIs. It says nothing about cost, rate limits, or cache behavior beyond what the schema's `depth`/`fresh` descriptions already state.

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 beginning with the core verb+resource, with no filler or restated title. The trailing list of return contents is somewhat redundant given an output schema exists, but it is compact and readable.

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 an 8-parameter tool with 38% schema coverage, the description leaves meaningful gaps: `mode` is the key behavioral switch and is unexplained in both schema and description. Output schema and annotations carry the return shape and safety profile, so the remaining shortfall is primarily around parameter selection guidance.

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 description coverage is only 38%, so the description needs to compensate, and it partially does by hinting at domain scoping (site restriction) and recency via the coverage facets. But the highest-leverage parameters, `mode` (6-valued enum with no schema description) and `vertical`, are never addressed, leaving the agent no help choosing among them.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search the public web') and ties the tool to its sibling by noting it returns 'a result_id for read_result', which clarifies the boundary with the read path. It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with `fetch`, so the differentiation is partial rather than complete.

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?

The mention of 'a result_id for read_result' implies the search-then-read workflow, giving implicit guidance on how this fits with siblings. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no when-not-to-use, and no guidance on selecting between this tool and `fetch` for content retrieval.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server