dataeyes-mcp-server
OfficialClick on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@dataeyes-mcp-serversearch for latest breakthroughs in renewable energy"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
DataEyes MCP Server
An MCP server that provides web search and page reading capabilities through the DataEyes API.
Tools
search — Search the web and get structured results.
read — Fetch a web page and extract its content.
Related MCP server: MCP Search & Fetch
Getting Your API Key
Register at shuyanai.com (中国站) or dataeyes.ai (Global) to obtain your API key.
Usage
stdio
For local MCP clients (Cursor, Claude Desktop, etc.) using uvx:
Global
{
"mcpServers": {
"dataeyes": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": ["dataeyes-mcp-server"],
"env": {
"DATAEYES_API_KEY": "your-api-key"
}
}
}
}中国站
{
"mcpServers": {
"dataeyes": {
"command": "uvx",
"args": ["dataeyes-mcp-server"],
"env": {
"DATAEYES_API_KEY": "your-api-key",
"DATAEYES_API_BASE_URL": "https://api.shuyanai.com"
}
}
}
}Environment Variable | Default | Description |
| — | API key (required) |
|
| API base URL |
Streamable HTTP
No installation required. Connect directly to the hosted MCP endpoint:
Global
{
"mcpServers": {
"dataeyes": {
"url": "https://mcp.dataeyes.ai/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "Bearer your-api-key"
}
}
}
}中国站
{
"mcpServers": {
"dataeyes": {
"url": "https://mcp.shuyanai.com/mcp",
"headers": {
"Authorization": "Bearer your-api-key"
}
}
}
}License
This project is licensed under the MIT License.
Available Tools
2 toolsreadARead-onlyIdempotent
Read and extract content from a web page URL.
Fetches the page, extracts the main content, and returns it in the requested format (markdown by default). Includes metadata such as title, description, and status code.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| params | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| metadata | No | Page metadata |
| html | No | HTML content |
| markdown | No | Markdown content |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark it as read-only and idempotent. The description adds that it extracts main content and returns metadata, enhancing transparency without contradiction.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Description is concise (4 lines), front-loaded with the main action, and free of fluff. Every sentence adds value.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the rich input schema and output schema (present), the description fully covers the tool's purpose and behavior. No missing elements for agent understanding.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already provides detailed descriptions for each parameter (url, timeout, format, etc.). The description adds only the default format, providing minimal extra semantic value.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states it reads and extracts content from a web page URL, specifies default format (markdown) and metadata returned, distinguishing it from the sibling 'search' tool.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance on when to use vs the sibling 'search' tool or any prerequisites/limitations. The description does not indicate appropriate contexts or alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
searchARead-onlyIdempotent
Search the web using DataEyes search engine.
Returns a list of web page results including title, URL, snippet, and relevance score. Useful for finding information, research, and discovering relevant web pages on any topic.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| params | Yes |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| originalQuery | Yes | The original search query |
| webPages | No | List of search results |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true. Description adds engine name and result structure but omits details on pagination, rate limits, or authentication. Adequate given annotations.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Three sentences, front-loaded with action, no extraneous details. Efficient and well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Describes output fields but does not summarize input parameters or filtering capabilities. Given the complex nested schema and multiple optional filters, the description could be more complete.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Description does not mention any parameters or filters. Schema property descriptions cover parameter semantics adequately, so no additional context is provided. Baseline score applies.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Clearly states the tool searches the web using DataEyes search engine and returns a list of results with specific fields (title, URL, snippet, relevance). Distinguishes from sibling 'read' which likely handles local content.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
Provides a general use case ('useful for finding information, research, discovering web pages') but lacks explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use comparisons with alternatives. Usage is implied rather than directive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
TDQS
The two tools have completely different purposes: one extracts content from a given URL, the other searches for URLs. There is no overlap or ambiguity.
Both tools use single-word imperative verbs ('read' and 'search') in lowercase, following a consistent and predictable pattern.
With only two tools, the server is minimal but covers the basic web interaction workflow (search then read). It is on the lower end of the typical range but not inappropriate for a focused purpose.
The server provides a complete workflow for finding and reading web content. A minor gap is the lack of tools for batch processing or advanced content extraction, but core needs are met.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
Web search and page-reading for AI agents. One-click OAuth connect, or a Caesar API key.
Paid web, news, company, product, and geographic search plus clean page reading for agents.
Provides AI assistants with access to Seltz's powerful Web Search capabilities.
Web search, news, page retrieval, sitemaps, and trending topics through Search1API.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseDqualityDmaintenanceProvides web connectivity tools for searching the web via DuckDuckGo or SerpAPI, fetching URL content, and extracting readable text from web pages.32
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides web search and page fetching capabilities using Ollama's API.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to read webpages and perform web searches using DuckDuckGo.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityBmaintenanceProvides web search and content extraction for AI agents.MIT
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/dataeyesai/dataeyes-mcp-server'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server