Skip to main content
Glama

search_docs

Read-only

Search Ansible documentation for conceptual guides by keyword, filtering by source, topic, or audience to retrieve relevant entries with summaries and raw URLs.

Instructions

Search documentation manifests for conceptual guides.

Returns up to 20 matching entries with title, summary, topic, audience, lines, source, and raw URL. On failure returns {"error": str}.

Choose source by corpus:

  • ansible-core (or omit): official HOWTO — playbooks, vault, inventory syntax

  • ansible-lint: rules and profiles

  • ansible-navigator / ansible-builder / ansible-creator / molecule: matching source

  • aap-2.5 / aap-2.6 / aap-2.7: AAP product manuals

  • cop-good-practices: CoP opinionated practices (role design, naming, CaC, Git, testing process). Users often say "best practices"; do not invent cop-best-practices. Unfiltered search fills the 20-hit window with official + AAP first; CoP may be absent — retry with source='cop-good-practices' for CoP-shaped questions.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch term to match against documentation titles, summaries, and topics
topicNoFilter by topic tag
sourceNoFilter to a single source (e.g. 'cop-good-practices', 'ansible-core', 'aap-2.6'). Good-practices / 'best practices' / GPA questions use source='cop-good-practices'.
audienceNoFilter by audience tag
core_onlyNoIf true, only return entries marked as core

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changedv0.10.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / source / description
      Previous value: -"Filter to a single source (e.g. 'ansible-core')"New value: +"Filter to a single source (e.g. 'cop-good-practices', 'ansible-core', 'aap-2.6'). Good-practices / 'best practices' / GPA questions use source='cop-good-practices'."
  2. First observedv0.7.0

TDQS

A4.8/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description discloses the result cap (up to 20 entries), the exact fields returned, the error shape, and a nuanced behavioral detail: unfiltered searches may exclude CoP content, so retrying with source='cop-good-practices' is advised. This is rich, non-obvious behavioral context.

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?

The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by return/error behavior and then the source mapping. Every sentence is informative, and the source list is compact and scannable. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the readOnly annotation, the presence of an output schema, and full schema coverage, the description covers all critical operational context: result limits, returned fields, failure shape, source selection, and edge-case behavior for CoP searches. Nothing essential is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, giving a baseline of 3, but the description goes well beyond the schema by enumerating and explaining each source corpus, the default behavior when source is omitted, and the 'do not invent cop-best-practices' caution. This materially improves an agent's ability to select the correct source value.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search documentation manifests for conceptual guides.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling search tools like search_modules, search_plugins, and search_collections, which target different artifact types.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description gives explicit, actionable source-selection guidance with a detailed corpus-to-source mapping, plus a retry instruction for CoP questions and a warning against inventing 'cop-best-practices.' It does not explicitly contrast this tool with sibling search tools, but the object type ('documentation manifests') and source guidance make the intended usage clear.

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