Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
@growi/mcp-server

@growi/mcp-server

Official
by growilabs
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

searchTags

Read-onlyIdempotent

Searches for tags in GROWI wikis, filtering by query string to find relevant tags.

Instructions

Search for tags in GROWI

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "searchTags"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qNoSearch query for tags (optional)
appNameNoGROWI app name to operate on (optional, uses default if not specified)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.1

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to restate these. However, it adds no additional behavioral details beyond the bare search action.

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 sentence, front-loaded, and contains no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise, though it could be slightly expanded with more context.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple search tool with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description is marginally complete. It lacks details on search behavior (e.g., fuzzy match, case sensitivity, pagination) but annotations cover safety.

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 descriptions cover both parameters (100% coverage). The description does not add any extra meaning or context about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states it searches for tags in GROWI. It is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool getTagList, which lists all tags.

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 like getTagList or searchPages. There is no mention of appropriate 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.

Deploy Server

Other Tools