Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
openclaw-tools-mcp

openclaw-tools-mcp

by haliphax-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

web_search

Search the web and retrieve relevant results. Use country, language, and date filters to refine your query and get targeted information.

Instructions

Search the web and return results

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "web_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of results to return
queryYesSearch query
countryNoCountry code filter (e.g. US)
languageNoLanguage code filter (e.g. en)
freshnessNoFreshness filter (e.g. day, week, month)
date_afterNoOnly results after this date (YYYY-MM-DD)
sessionKeyNoOpenClaw session key for routing
date_beforeNoOnly results before this date (YYYY-MM-DD)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'return results' without mentioning safety, result format, pagination, or any limitations, which is insufficient for a search tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no wasted words, but it is borderline under-specified. It states the core function without elaboration, which is concise but not richly informative.

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 tool's 8 parameters and lack of annotations and output schema, the description is clearly insufficient. It fails to explain search behavior, result structure, or filter usage, leaving significant gaps for an agent.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning about how parameters like count, country, or freshness affect results, relying entirely on the schema.

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 uses the verb 'search' and the resource 'the web', clearly stating the core action. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like web_fetch, which fetches specific URLs, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 such as web_fetch or browser. There is no indication of suitable contexts or exclusions, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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