Skip to main content
Glama
arjunkmrm

Perplexity Deep Research MCP

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.
  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The tool 'deep_research' has a clearly distinct and singular purpose, making it impossible for an agent to misselect among alternatives.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    A single tool inherently exhibits perfect naming consistency, as there are no other tools to compare against. The name 'deep_research' follows a clear and descriptive pattern without any deviations or mixed conventions.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is generally too few for most server purposes, as it limits functionality and flexibility. While the tool is well-described for deep web research, the server's scope feels thin and underdeveloped, which could hinder agent workflows that require more granular operations.

    Completeness2/5

    The server is severely incomplete for a research domain, as it only offers a single broad search tool. There are obvious gaps, such as no tools for filtering results, managing queries, accessing specific sources, or performing follow-up actions, which will likely cause agent failures in complex research tasks.

  • Average 3.1/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

  • Add a LICENSE file by following GitHub's guide. Once GitHub recognizes the license, the system will automatically detect it within a few hours.

    If the license does not appear after some time, you can manually trigger a new scan using the MCP server admin interface.

    MCP servers without a LICENSE cannot be installed.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • This server has been verified by its author.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool provides 'detailed and contextually relevant results with citations,' which hints at output behavior, but lacks critical details like rate limits, authentication requirements, error handling, or whether it's a read-only operation. For a web search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is insufficient.

    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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's function and key features without unnecessary words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

    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?

    Given the tool's moderate complexity (web search with two parameters) and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on output format, error cases, or behavioral constraints. With no annotations and incomplete behavioral transparency, it meets the minimum viable threshold but has clear gaps.

    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?

    The input schema has 100% description coverage, clearly documenting both parameters. The description does not add any meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain parameter interactions, default behaviors, or usage examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

    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?

    The description clearly states the tool performs a 'comprehensive web search' using a specific API (Perplexity's Deep Research API), which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, with no sibling tools mentioned, there's no opportunity to distinguish from alternatives, so it cannot achieve a perfect score of 5.

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

    Usage Guidelines2/5

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

    The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or specific contexts. It mentions the API provides 'detailed and contextually relevant results with citations,' but this is a feature description rather than usage guidance.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

perplexity-deep-research MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

perplexity-deep-research MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/arjunkmrm/perplexity-deep-research'

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