Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mealie-mcp

mealie-mcp

by proffalken
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

search_recipes

Search recipes by name or ingredients to quickly locate dishes and get direct links to their Mealie pages.

Instructions

Search for recipes by name or ingredients. Each recipe includes a url linking to its Mealie page; quote it exactly when linking.

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_recipes"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesText to search recipe names and ingredients for

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.0

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden; it does disclose that results carry a `url` field and gives an explicit instruction to quote it exactly, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. However, it says nothing about read-only nature, result limits, pagination, or what a zero-match response looks like.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no filler. The second sentence is slightly tangential to invocation but earns its place by preventing broken links.

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

Completeness4/5

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

For a one-parameter search tool with no output schema, the description covers what is searched and what each result contains (including the url), which is close to sufficient. Missing pagination or result-count behavior is a minor but real gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the single `query` parameter is already documented as searching recipe names and ingredients, so the description's phrasing largely restates the schema. No additional syntax, matching behavior, or format detail is added beyond the structured field.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search for recipes') and specifies the search fields (names or ingredients), which clearly separates it from get_recipe, which would fetch one known recipe. It stops short of explicitly naming get_recipe as the alternative for a known recipe.

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 search-by-name-or-ingredients framing implies you use this when you don't have a specific recipe reference, but the description never states when to use get_recipe instead, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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