Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-toolbox

mcp-toolbox

by jorgitobg
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

search_boe

Search the bundled Spanish BOE corpus by keywords to find official documents offline; title matches rank higher for precise results. Read-only and works without network access.

Instructions

Search the bundled BOE corpus by keywords. Title matches weigh 3x. Offline, read-only.

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": "search_boe"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.3/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose two genuinely useful traits: the search runs offline and is read-only, and title matches are weighted 3x in ranking. It omits total corpus size, how many results are typically returned, and any behavior around the limit default.

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?

Three short sentences, zero filler, with the core action front-loaded and the ranking rule immediately after it. Nothing could be removed without losing 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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return values need not be described. Still, for a corpus search the description leaves key unknowns: what corpus scope/size is bundled, whether the query supports operators or phrases, and what `limit` constrains.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning for `query` (keyword-based matching with title weighting) but says nothing about `limit` — no maximum, no effect on ranking or truncation — leaving the second parameter undocumented everywhere.

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?

"Search the bundled BOE corpus by keywords" gives a specific verb (search) and resource (BOE corpus) plus the matching mode. It is clear enough to separate from get_boe_document, though it never names that sibling or states that it returns ranked matches rather than documents.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of when to prefer get_boe_document or triage_tenders. Only "offline, read-only" hints at the operating context; the agent must infer the search-then-fetch workflow on its own.

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