Skip to main content
Glama
cubicecho

RAGDown

by cubicecho
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Search documents

ragdown_recall
Read-only

Search local Markdown documents with hybrid semantic and keyword matching to retrieve relevant sections and surrounding context for answering questions.

Instructions

Hybrid (semantic + keyword) search over the user's Markdown documents. Returns the most relevant sections with file path, line range, heading breadcrumb and cosine similarity (above ~0.8 is usually on topic) and the day the file last changed. A section of a document an agent wrote says so. Use it before answering anything the documents may cover; follow up with ragdown_read_doc for the surrounding text.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoOnly search documents with this tag (frontmatter tags or inline #tags); 'project' also matches 'project/alpha'
queryYesWhat to look for, as a question or keywords
top_kNo
formatNotext
max_charsNotext format: characters per hit before it is clipped (0 = never)
written_byNoOnly documents an agent wrote ('agent': frontmatter has created_by) or only the user's own ('user')
path_prefixNoOnly search files under this subfolder, relative to the documents root, e.g. 'projects/'

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv5.16.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / path_prefix / description
      Previous value: -"Only search files under this subfolder, relative to the notes root, e.g. 'projects/'"New value: +"Only search files under this subfolder, relative to the documents root, e.g. 'projects/'"
    • changedInput schema / properties / tag / description
      Previous value: -"Only search notes with this tag (frontmatter tags or inline #tags); 'project' also matches 'project/alpha'"New value: +"Only search documents with this tag (frontmatter tags or inline #tags); 'project' also matches 'project/alpha'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / written_by
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only documents an agent wrote ('agent': frontmatter has created_by) or only the user's own ('user')",
+  "enum": [
+    "agent",
+    "user"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed2 schema fields changedv5.2.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / path_prefix / description
      Previous value: -"Only search files under this folder, relative to the notes root, e.g. 'projects/'"New value: +"Only search files under this subfolder, relative to the notes root, e.g. 'projects/'"
    • addedInput schema / properties / tag
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Only search notes with this tag (frontmatter tags or inline #tags); 'project' also matches 'project/alpha'",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With readOnlyHint/openWorldHint already covering the safety profile, the description adds real behavioral context: what a hit contains, how to interpret the cosine similarity (~0.8 means on topic), that provenance is signaled when a section was written by an agent, and that results are clipped. Missing details are minor (ordering, dedup, empty-result 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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the search mechanism before return shape and usage routing. The middle sentence is dense but each clause (path, line range, breadcrumb, similarity, last-changed) earns its place by substituting for a missing output schema.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a 7-parameter read tool with no output schema and no annotations carrying behavioral detail, the description supplies return fields and usage routing well. It leaves gaps on default result count, the text vs json format switch, and handling of empty results.

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 coverage is 71%, and the description adds essentially no parameter guidance — tag, path_prefix, written_by, top_k, format and max_chars are documented only in the schema. The similarity-threshold hint is useful interpretation but does not map to an input parameter. Baseline 3 for moderate coverage with no compensating description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource — hybrid semantic + keyword search over the user's Markdown documents — and immediately distinguishes itself from the browsing siblings (list, read_doc, backlinks). An agent can identify the retrieval tool without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('before answering anything the documents may cover') and names a follow-up tool (ragdown_read_doc for surrounding text). It gives no when-not conditions or contrast against similar retrieval siblings such as ragdown_context, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools