mouser-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Search Mouser parts

search_parts

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Mouser’s catalog by keyword, optionally limiting results to one manufacturer and filtering for in-stock or RoHS-compliant parts.

Instructions

Keyword search of Mouser's catalog, optionally limited to one manufacturer and filtered to in-stock and/or RoHS-compliant parts. Returns the total match count and up to 50 compact part summaries per call; page with offset (with a manufacturer, offset must be a multiple of limit). Mouser has no parametric filtering or sorting (e.g. by capacitance, voltage or price), so filter by the returned descriptions.

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": {
      "keyword": "<keyword>"
    },
    "name": "search_parts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Default 10.
`filter`	No	Default none.
`offset`	No	Default 0.
`keyword`	Yes	Search text, e.g. '3.3V LDO SOT-23'.
`manufacturer`	No	Exact Mouser manufacturer name (see list_manufacturers).

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`parts`	Yes
`totalResults`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.0.5Nov 6, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, openWorld, non-destructive), and the description adds real behavioral detail on top: result volume (total match count, up to 50 summaries per call), pagination, the offset-must-be-a-multiple-of-limit rule when a manufacturer is set, and the absence of server-side parametric sorting.

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?

Three tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with purpose, then return shape, then the key limitation. No filler or repetition of the title.

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?

For a 5-parameter read-only search with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description covers everything an agent needs: what is searched, how to paginate, the pagination constraint, and the capability boundary. Return-shape detail is appropriately brief since an output schema exists.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning the schema does not: the offset/limit multiple constraint and the practical guidance to filter on returned descriptions. It does not expand on the filter enum values beyond what their names imply, keeping it just short of a 5.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ('Keyword search of Mouser's catalog') plus explicit scope qualifiers (one manufacturer, in-stock/RoHS filters). The word 'keyword' distinguishes it from the sibling get_parts lookup, and it names list_manufacturers as the source for valid manufacturer values.

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?

It gives clear operating context: use keywords, optionally restrict to one manufacturer, and filter by stock/RoHS. It also explicitly says what the tool cannot do ('no parametric filtering or sorting ... filter by the returned descriptions'), which prevents misuse. It never states when to prefer this over the sibling get_parts, which is the remaining gap.

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

Deploy Server