Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
node-opcua-modeler-mcp-server

node-opcua-modeler-mcp-server

Official
by node-opcua
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

search_types

Search across all OPC UA companion specifications for types matching a keyword. Find the namespace alias for any type when the defining specification is unknown.

Instructions

Search for types across ALL companion specs by keyword. Use this when you don't know which namespace defines a type. Returns matching types with their namespace alias.

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_types"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesSearch keyword (e.g. "identification", "temperature", "motion")

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.3.0

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses search across all specs, returns matching types with namespace alias. Implies read-only behavior, no contradictions.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded action and scope. No wasted words. Each sentence adds value.

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 only one required parameter, no output schema, and simple behavior, the description fully covers what the tool does and returns. Sibling tools are different (e.g., find_reusable_block is for blocks not types).

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with description for 'query' parameter. Description adds examples of search keywords (e.g., 'identification', 'temperature'), providing extra helpful context beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states 'Search for types across ALL companion specs by keyword.' The verb 'search' and resource 'types' are specific, and the scope 'across all companion specs' distinguishes it from siblings like list_types or get_type_details.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you don't know which namespace defines a type.' Provides clear context for when to use, though doesn't explicitly state when not to use.

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