MCP DuckDuckGo Search Plugin
Provides web search functionality with detailed results, related searches, pagination support, domain extraction, advanced filtering by site and time period, enhanced content extraction, basic web spidering, metadata extraction, and content structure analysis.
Click 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., "@MCP DuckDuckGo Search Pluginfind recent articles about AI advancements in healthcare"
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.
MCP DuckDuckGo
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that provides web search capabilities using DuckDuckGo. This server enables LLMs to search the web and retrieve detailed content from websites through structured data extraction.
Key Features
Fast and reliable. Uses DuckDuckGo's web interface with robust HTML parsing
LLM-friendly. Returns structured data optimized for AI consumption
Content extraction. Intelligently extracts and summarizes webpage content
Related searches. Generates contextual search suggestions
Related MCP server: MCP DuckDuckGo
Requirements
Python 3.10 or newer
VS Code, Cursor, Windsurf, Claude Desktop, Goose or any other MCP client
Getting started
First, install the DuckDuckGo MCP server with your client.
Standard config works in most of the tools:
{
"mcpServers": {
"duckduckgo-search": {
"command": "mcp-duckduckgo"
}
}
}Claude Code
Use the Claude Code CLI to add the DuckDuckGo MCP server:
claude mcp add duckduckgo-search mcp-duckduckgoFor global configuration (available in all projects):
claude mcp add duckduckgo-search --scope user mcp-duckduckgoClaude Desktop
Follow the MCP install guide, use the standard config above.
Cursor
Go to Cursor Settings -> MCP .
Click the button to install:
Or install manually:
Go to Cursor Settings -> MCP -> Add new MCP Server. Name to your liking, use command type with the command mcp-duckduckgo.
VS Code
Click the button to install:
Or install manually:
Follow the MCP install guide, use the standard config above.
You can also install the DuckDuckGo MCP server using the VS Code CLI:
code --add-mcp '{"name":"duckduckgo-search","command":"mcp-duckduckgo"}'After installation, the DuckDuckGo MCP server will be available for use with your GitHub Copilot agent in VS Code.
Windsurf
Follow Windsurf MCP documentation. Use the standard config above.
Goose
Click the button to install:
Or install manually:
Go to Advanced settings -> Extensions -> Add custom extension. Name to your liking, use type STDIO, and set the command to mcp-duckduckgo. Click "Add Extension".
LM Studio
Click the button to install:
Or install manually:
Go to Program in the right sidebar -> Install -> Edit mcp.json. Use the standard config above.
Configuration
DuckDuckGo MCP server supports following arguments:
mcp-duckduckgo --helpAvailable options:
--port PORT Port number for the MCP server (default: 3000)
--version Show program's version number and exit
--help Show help message and exitEnvironment Variables
MCP_PORT: Set the port number for the server (default: 3000)
Example usage:
# Set port via environment variable
export MCP_PORT=8080
mcp-duckduckgo
# Or set it inline
MCP_PORT=8080 mcp-duckduckgoAvailable Tools
web_search
Title: Web Search
Description: Search the web using DuckDuckGo
Parameters:
query(string): Search query (max 400 characters)max_results(number, optional): Maximum number of results to return (1-20, default 10)
Read-only: false
get_page_content
Title: Get Page Content
Description: Retrieve and extract content from a web page
Parameters:
url(string): URL to fetch content from
Read-only: false
suggest_related_searches
Title: Suggest Related Searches
Description: Generate contextual search suggestions based on a query
Parameters:
query(string): Original search querymax_suggestions(number, optional): Maximum suggestions to return (1-10, default 5)
Read-only: true
Installation from Source
If you need to install from source or development:
Using uv (Recommended)
uv is a fast Python package manager:
# Install uv if you haven't already
curl -LsSf https://astral.sh/uv/install.sh | sh
# Install from GitHub
uv tool install git+https://github.com/gianlucamazza/mcp-duckduckgo.gitUsing pip
# Clone and install
git clone https://github.com/gianlucamazza/mcp-duckduckgo.git
cd mcp-duckduckgo
pip install -e .Development Installation
git clone https://github.com/gianlucamazza/mcp-duckduckgo.git
cd mcp-duckduckgo
# Install in development mode
pip install -e .
# Run tests
pip install -e ".[test]"
pytestLicense
Repository
Available Tools
3 toolsget_page_contentC
Fetch and extract content from a web page.
Returns the page title, description, and main content.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | URL to fetch content from |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
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. It mentions what the tool returns ('page title, description, and main content'), which is helpful, but lacks critical details like error handling, rate limits, authentication needs, or performance characteristics. For a web-fetching tool, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its behavior.
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?
The description is appropriately concise with two sentences that directly address purpose and return values. It's front-loaded with the core functionality. However, the second sentence could be more integrated with the first for better flow, and there's some whitespace formatting that slightly affects structure.
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 tool has an output schema (which handles return value documentation) and 100% schema coverage for the single parameter, the description provides adequate context for basic understanding. However, for a web content extraction tool with no annotations, it should ideally mention common constraints like URL validation, content type limitations, or network timeout behavior to 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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with the 'url' parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description.
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 the tool's purpose with specific verbs ('fetch and extract content from a web page') and identifies the resource ('web page'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'suggest_related_searches' and 'web_search' by focusing on content extraction rather than search or suggestions. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself from potential similar tools not in the sibling list.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'web_search' or 'suggest_related_searches'. There's no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or typical use cases. The agent must infer usage from the purpose alone, which is insufficient for optimal tool selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
web_searchB
Search the web using DuckDuckGo.
Returns a list of search results with titles, URLs, descriptions, and domains.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query | |
| max_results | No | Maximum number of results to return (1-20) |
Output Schema
| Name | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the search engine (DuckDuckGo) and return format, but lacks critical details like rate limits, authentication needs, privacy implications, or error handling. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding its operational behavior.
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?
The description is extremely concise and front-loaded: two sentences that directly state the tool's function and output. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly.
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 tool's moderate complexity (web search with two parameters), no annotations, and an output schema (implied by context signals), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and output format, but lacks usage guidelines and behavioral details that would be helpful for an AI agent, especially without annotations.
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?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents both parameters (query and max_results). The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, such as query formatting tips or result ordering. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.
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 the tool's purpose: 'Search the web using DuckDuckGo' specifies the action (search) and resource (web via DuckDuckGo). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'get_page_content' (which fetches specific page content) and 'suggest_related_searches' (which suggests queries), but could be more explicit about this differentiation.
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?
The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when to choose web_search over get_page_content (e.g., for broad queries vs. specific URLs) or suggest_related_searches (e.g., for refining searches). There's no context about use cases or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
TDQS
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_page_content extracts content from a specific URL, web_search performs general web searches, and suggest_related_searches provides autocomplete suggestions. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (get_page_content, suggest_related_searches, web_search) using snake_case. The naming is predictable and readable, with no deviations in style or convention.
With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for a DuckDuckGo search plugin. Each tool serves a distinct and essential function in the search workflow, from performing searches to extracting content and getting suggestions, with no unnecessary redundancy.
The tool surface covers core search operations effectively, including searching, content extraction, and related suggestions. A minor gap exists in advanced search features like filtering by date or region, but agents can work around this with the provided tools for most use cases.
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
Scrape, crawl and search the web for AI agents via MCP.
Web search, scraping, RAG answers with citations, and translation as MCP tools.
Search the agentic web. 4,100+ sites, 11 tools incl. check_url + verify_mcp for probe-before-use.
Web search, URL content extraction to Markdown, site mapping, and recursive web crawler.
Related MCP Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to perform real-time web searches, fetch webpage content, and get search suggestions using DuckDuckGo's privacy-focused search engine.
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceEnables AI assistants to search the internet using DuckDuckGo and extract clean, formatted content from web pages.262GPL 3.0
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceProvides fast, self-hosted web search and reliable web scraping using SearXNG and Crawl4AI, integrated as MCP tools for Claude Code.41
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceProvides DuckDuckGo web search and site fetching tools for Claude Desktop, enabling up to 10 search results and text content extraction from URLs.2MIT
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/gianlucamazza/mcp-duckduckgo'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server