OVHcloud MCP Server

ovh_api_search

Search OVH API endpoints by keyword or path pattern across all categories, or filter by category and HTTP method.

Instructions

Search OVH API endpoints by keyword or path pattern. Searches endpoint paths and descriptions across all (or specific) API categories.

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": "ovh_api_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	Search keyword (e.g. 'snapshot', 'email', 'kubernetes', 'ip block')
`category`	No	Limit to API category (e.g. '/vps', '/cloud', '/domain'). Omit to search all.
`method`	No	Filter by HTTP method

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv2.0.1Jun 8, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the search function, omitting whether the tool is read-only, if it requires authentication, or any rate limits. This sparse disclosure is insufficient.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the tool's primary purpose. No extraneous words or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description should hint at the return format (e.g., list of matching endpoints). It only mentions that it searches paths and descriptions, leaving the output structure ambiguous. Adequate for a simple search but could improve.

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 baseline is 3. The description reinforces the query parameter as a keyword but adds no new semantic detail beyond the schema's descriptions of category and method. No clarification of value formats or constraints.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it searches OVH API endpoints by keyword or path pattern, with optional category and method filtering. It distinguishes from siblings like ovh_api_catalog (lists categories) and ovh_api_endpoint_detail (single endpoint), making its unique purpose evident.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for finding endpoints but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., ovh_api_catalog for browsing all endpoints, ovh_api_endpoint_detail for a specific one). No when-not-to-use or trade-offs are mentioned.

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