Skip to main content
Glama
chick-p

Algolia Search MCP Server

by chick-p
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v0.0.1

  • Disambiguation5/5

    With only one tool, there is no possibility of ambiguity or overlap between tools. The single tool 'search_index' has a clearly distinct purpose that cannot be confused with any other tool in this set.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    The naming is trivially consistent as there is only one tool. It follows a clear verb_noun pattern ('search_index'), and there are no other tools to create inconsistency or mixed conventions.

    Tool Count2/5

    A single tool is too few for a server named 'Algolia Search MCP Server', which implies broader search capabilities. While the tool 'search_index' covers basic search, typical search servers include tools for indexing, configuration, or multiple search methods, making this scope feel thin and incomplete.

    Completeness2/5

    The server is severely incomplete for a search domain. It only provides search functionality without any tools for creating, updating, or managing indices, or handling other search-related operations like analytics or settings. This creates significant gaps that will limit agent effectiveness.

  • Average 2.6/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

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

  • This repository is archived. Archived repositories automatically receive an F maintenance tier.

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • 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.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • 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?

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action ('Search query') without detailing traits like read-only vs. destructive nature, authentication needs, rate limits, or response format. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

    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?

    The description is a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded. However, it could be more structured by including key details, but it earns a high score for brevity and clarity within its limited scope.

    Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

    Completeness2/5

    Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

    Given the tool's complexity (a search function with no output schema and no annotations), the description is incomplete. It lacks information on what the search returns, error handling, or any behavioral context, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand how to use the tool effectively.

    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, with the parameter 'q' documented as 'Query string'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as query syntax or examples. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't detract either.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose3/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description 'Search query from Algolia index' specifies the action ('Search query') and target ('Algolia index'), which provides a basic purpose. However, it's vague about what exactly is being searched (e.g., documents, records, products) and doesn't distinguish from siblings since there are none, but it lacks specificity in the verb+resource combination.

    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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool, such as scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives. With no sibling tools, it doesn't need to differentiate, but it fails to provide any usage context, leaving the agent without direction on appropriate invocation.

    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

algolia-search-mcp-server MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

algolia-search-mcp-server 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/chick-p/algolia-search-mcp-server'

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