Skip to main content
Glama
enesjakozh
magarcia

MCP Server Giphy

by magarcia
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

MCP 服务器 Giphy

铁匠徽章 CI npm 版本 npm 下载 许可证：MIT

Giphy API 的 MCP 服务器，使 AI 模型能够搜索、检索和利用来自 Giphy 的 GIF。

特征

  • 内容过滤：按等级（G、PG、PG-13、R）过滤结果，以确保内容合适

  • 优化响应格式：针对 AI 模型使用优化的响应数据

  • 多种搜索方式：支持基于查询、随机和趋势的 GIF 检索

  • 全面的元数据：每个 GIF 都带有完整的元数据，包括尺寸、格式和属性

  • 分页支持：控制结果大小和分页，以高效使用 API

工具

  1. search_gifs

    • 使用查询字符串在 Giphy 上搜索 GIF

    • 输入：

      • query （字符串）：搜索查询词或短语

      • limit （可选数字）：返回的最大对象数（默认值：10，最大值：50）

      • offset （可选数字）：结果偏移量（默认值：0）

      • rating （可选字符串）：内容评级（g、pg、pg-13、r）

      • lang （可选字符串）：语言代码（默认值：en）

    • 返回：带有元数据的 GIF 对象数组

  2. get_random_gif

    • 从 Giphy 获取随机 GIF，可选择按标签过滤

    • 输入：

      • tag （可选字符串）：限制随机结果的标签

      • rating （可选字符串）：内容评级（g、pg、pg-13、r）

    • 返回：带有元数据的随机 GIF 对象

  3. get_trending_gifs

    • 获取 Giphy 上当前流行的 GIF

    • 输入：

      • limit （可选数字）：返回的最大对象数（默认值：10，最大值：50）

      • offset （可选数字）：结果偏移量（默认值：0）

      • rating （可选字符串）：内容评级（g、pg、pg-13、r）

    • 返回：带有元数据的流行 GIF 对象数组

Related MCP server: Giphy MCP Server

响应格式

响应中的每个 GIF 都包含：

  • id ：唯一的 Giphy 标识符

  • title ：GIF标题

  • url ：Giphy 网站上 GIF 的 URL

  • images ：包含各种图像格式的对象，每种格式都具有：

    • url ：图像文件的直接 URL

    • width ：图像宽度

    • height ：图像高度

  • 附加元数据（如有）

设置

通过 Smithery 安装

要通过Smithery自动为 Claude Desktop 安装 mcp-server-giphy：

npx -y @smithery/cli install mcp-server-giphy --client claude

Giphy API 密钥

创建 Giphy API 密钥：

  • 注册 Giphy 开发者帐户

  • 创建应用以获取 API 密钥

  • 根据您的需求选择免费套餐或付费套餐

环境配置

使用您的 API 密钥创建一个.env文件：

GIPHY_API_KEY=your_api_key_here

与 Claude Desktop 一起使用

要将其与 Claude Desktop 一起使用，请将以下内容添加到您的claude_desktop_config.json中：

{
  "mcpServers": {
    "giphy": {
      "command": "npx",
      "args": ["-y", "mcp-server-giphy"],
      "env": {
        "GIPHY_API_KEY": "<YOUR_API_KEY>"
      }
    }
  }
}

发展

# Install dependencies
npm install

# Build the project
npm run build

# Start the server
npm start

# Run in development mode with hot reloading
npm run dev

# Run tests
npm test

# Use with MCP Inspector
npm run inspector

执照

此 MCP 服务器采用 MIT 许可证。这意味着您可以自由使用、修改和分发该软件，但须遵守 MIT 许可证的条款和条件。更多详情，请参阅项目仓库中的 LICENSE 文件。

Available Tools

3 tools
get_random_gifA

Get a random GIF from Giphy, optionally filtered by tag

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagNoTag to limit random results (optional)
ratingNoContent rating (g, pg, pg-13, r)

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 full burden. It states the tool fetches from Giphy but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication needs, response format, or error handling. For an external API tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Get a random GIF from Giphy') and adds optional detail ('optionally filtered by tag') without waste. Every word earns its place, making it appropriately sized and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (external API call with parameters) and no annotations or output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, response format, or error handling, leaving gaps that could hinder effective use by 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('tag' and 'rating') with descriptions and enum values. The description adds minimal value by mentioning optional tag filtering, but doesn't provide additional syntax or context beyond what the schema provides, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 the specific action ('Get a random GIF') and resource ('from Giphy'), with optional filtering by tag. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying 'random' (vs. 'trending' or 'search'), making the purpose explicit and differentiated.

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 random GIF retrieval, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_trending_gifs' or 'search_gifs'. It mentions optional tag filtering, which hints at context, but lacks clear when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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

search_gifsC

Search for GIFs on Giphy with a query string

ParametersJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch query term or phrase
limitNoMaximum number of objects to return (default: 10, max: 50)
offsetNoResults offset (default: 0)
ratingNoContent rating (g, pg, pg-13, r)
langNoLanguage code (default: en)

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the action ('Search for GIFs') but fails to disclose critical traits like rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or response format. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to understand operational behavior.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It is appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 complexity of a search tool with 5 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral aspects, usage context, and output expectations, leaving the agent with insufficient information for effective tool selection and invocation.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters thoroughly. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as usage examples or constraints not in the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 the action ('Search for GIFs') and resource ('on Giphy'), with the specific mechanism ('with a query string'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'get_random_gif' and 'get_trending_gifs' by specifying search functionality, though it could be more explicit about the distinction.

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 'get_random_gif' or 'get_trending_gifs'. It lacks context such as use cases for search versus random/trending GIFs, making it unclear when this is the appropriate choice.

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

Tool Schema Changelog

Recent tool additions, removals, and schema changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. 3 tool updates
    • First observedget_random_gif
    • First observedget_trending_gifs
    • First observedsearch_gifs
Deploy Server
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Scored across 3 tools

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: get_random_gif retrieves a single random GIF, get_trending_gifs fetches trending content, and search_gifs performs query-based searches. There is no overlap in functionality, making tool selection straightforward for an agent.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'get' or 'search' verbs and descriptive nouns (random_gif, trending_gifs, gifs). The naming is uniform and predictable across the set.

Tool Count5/5

With 3 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of accessing Giphy content. Each tool serves a distinct and essential function (random, trending, search), and there are no extraneous or missing tools for this domain.

Completeness5/5

The tool surface covers the core workflows for a Giphy API: retrieving random GIFs, accessing trending content, and searching by query. This provides complete coverage for typical use cases without obvious gaps or dead ends.

Maintenance

ActivityInactive
ResponsivenessNo issues

Resources

Related MCP Connectors

Related MCP Servers

  • Giphy MCP Server

    mcp-ag2
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    This is an auto-generated Multi-Agent Conversation Protocol server that enables interaction with the Giphy API, allowing users to access and use Giphy's GIF services through natural language commands.
    -

  • Giphy MCP Server

    qingyun-ag2
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An MCP (Multi-Agent Conversation Protocol) Server that enables interaction with the Giphy API, allowing agents to search, retrieve, and manage GIF animations through natural language commands.
    -

  • Giphy MCP Server

    Boris-Song
    -
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    Not graded
    maintenance
    An MCP (Multi-Agent Conversation Protocol) Server that enables interaction with the Giphy API, allowing users to search, retrieve, and manipulate GIF content through natural language commands.
    -

  • Giphy API MCP Server

    rigzindorje
    F
    license
    Not graded
    quality
    D
    maintenance
    An auto-generated Model Context Protocol Server that enables interaction with Giphy's API, allowing users to access and manipulate GIF content through natural language requests.
    -