Skip to main content
Glama
fetchSERP

FetchSERP MCP Server

Official
by fetchSERP

get_serp_results

Retrieve search engine results pages (SERPs) by querying popular engines like Google, Bing, Yahoo, or DuckDuckGo. Specify country, engine, and pages to gather SERP data for SEO analysis or research.

Instructions

Get search engine results

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countryNoThe country to search from. Default: usus
pages_numberNoThe number of pages to search (1-30). Default: 1
queryYesThe query to search
search_engineNoThe search engine to use (google, bing, yahoo, duckduckgo). Default: googlegoogle

Implementation Reference

  • index.js:324-354 (registration)
    Tool registration in listTools handler, defining name, description, and input schema for get_serp_results.
    {
      name: 'get_serp_results',
      description: 'Get search engine results',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          query: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The query to search',
          },
          search_engine: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The search engine to use (google, bing, yahoo, duckduckgo). Default: google',
            default: 'google',
          },
          country: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'The country to search from. Default: us',
            default: 'us',
          },
          pages_number: {
            type: 'integer',
            description: 'The number of pages to search (1-30). Default: 1',
            default: 1,
            minimum: 1,
            maximum: 30,
          },
        },
        required: ['query'],
      },
    },
  • Handler implementation in the switch statement of handleToolCall method, which proxies the tool arguments to the FetchSERP API endpoint '/api/v1/serp'.
    case 'get_serp_results':
      return await this.makeRequest('/api/v1/serp', 'GET', args, null, token);
  • Shared helper method used by all tools, including get_serp_results, to make authenticated HTTP requests to the FetchSERP API.
    async makeRequest(endpoint, method = 'GET', params = {}, body = null, token = null) {
      const fetchserpToken = token || process.env.FETCHSERP_API_TOKEN;
      
      if (!fetchserpToken) {
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InvalidRequest,
          'FETCHSERP_API_TOKEN is required'
        );
      }
    
      const url = new URL(`${API_BASE_URL}${endpoint}`);
      
      // Add query parameters for GET requests
      if (method === 'GET' && Object.keys(params).length > 0) {
        Object.entries(params).forEach(([key, value]) => {
          if (value !== undefined && value !== null) {
            if (Array.isArray(value)) {
              value.forEach(v => url.searchParams.append(`${key}[]`, v));
            } else {
              url.searchParams.append(key, value.toString());
            }
          }
        });
      }
    
      const fetchOptions = {
        method,
        headers: {
          'Authorization': `Bearer ${fetchserpToken}`,
          'Content-Type': 'application/json',
        },
      };
    
      if (body && method !== 'GET') {
        fetchOptions.body = JSON.stringify(body);
      }
    
      const response = await fetch(url.toString(), fetchOptions);
      
      if (!response.ok) {
        const errorText = await response.text();
        throw new McpError(
          ErrorCode.InternalError,
          `API request failed: ${response.status} ${response.statusText} - ${errorText}`
        );
      }
    
      return await response.json();
    }
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Get search engine results' implies a read operation but doesn't specify whether this is a live search, cached results, rate limits, authentication requirements, or what format the results come in. For a tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, this minimal description leaves significant behavioral questions unanswered.

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 maximally concise at just three words. It's front-loaded with the essential action and resource, with zero wasted words or unnecessary elaboration. This represents ideal conciseness for a tool with good schema documentation.

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 complexity of search operations, lack of annotations, and absence of an output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It doesn't explain what format results come in, whether this is a live API call, rate limits, or how it differs from SERP sibling tools. For a tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, more context is needed.

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 all 4 parameters well-documented including defaults, constraints, and allowed values. The description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for high schema coverage without adding extra value.

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 'Get search engine results' clearly states the verb ('Get') and resource ('search engine results'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'get_serp_html' or 'get_serp_text' that also retrieve search results in different formats, so it doesn't reach the highest score.

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. With multiple SERP-related siblings (get_serp_ai_mode, get_serp_html, get_serp_text), there's no indication of what distinguishes this tool from those or when it would be preferred. The description alone offers no usage context.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Related Tools

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/fetchSERP/fetchserp-mcp-server-node'

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