Skip to main content
Glama
mnhlt

WebSearch-MCP

by mnhlt
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

67%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.3

  • Disambiguation5/5

    Only one tool exists, so there is no ambiguity. The single tool's purpose is clearly defined as searching the web.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    With only one tool, naming consistency is trivially maintained. The name 'web_search' follows a clear verb_noun pattern.

    Tool Count3/5

    A single tool for a web search server is minimal but acceptable for basic functionality. However, a more complete server might include tools for fetching page content or image search, making the count borderline.

    Completeness3/5

    The server provides only a search tool, missing common complementary tools like fetching web page content or performing advanced searches. This leaves notable gaps for typical workflows.

  • Average 3.2/5 across 1 of 1 tools scored.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • No community issues in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI status not available

  • This repository is licensed under ISC License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does not mention potential side effects, rate limits, or permissions. The only behavioral detail is the retry advice, which is insufficient for a tool performing external web requests.

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

    Conciseness2/5

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

    The description is overly repetitive, listing 'You can also use this tool to search for...' multiple times, which adds no value and wastes tokens. The retry advice is useful but could be condensed. A single sentence covering the core function and filtering options would suffice.

    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?

    For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description provides a basic overview but lacks details on pagination, error handling beyond the retry note, and the structure of results. The schema covers parameter details, but the description does not fully fill the gaps for a complex tool.

    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?

    All 8 parameters have descriptions in the schema, so the schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-specific information beyond what is in the schema, matching the baseline expectation. The retry advice does not relate to parameters.

    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 'Search the web for information,' which defines the tool's purpose. However, it lacks specificity and reads as a general search tool rather than highlighting unique capabilities. There are no sibling tools, so no need for differentiation, but the description could be more concise.

    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 includes explicit guidance on when to use ('when you need to search the web') and a specific retry strategy for failed requests with small result numbers. No siblings exist, so no alternatives to discuss, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

WebSearch-MCP MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

WebSearch-MCP MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mnhlt/WebSearch-MCP'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server