Skip to main content
Glama
q6066697

rag-mcp-server

by q6066697

search_documents

Performs hybrid search across indexed markdown documents using dense embeddings and BM25 with reciprocal rank fusion, returning ranked snippets relevant to a user query.

Instructions

Гибридный поиск (dense-эмбеддинги + BM25, слитые через Reciprocal Rank Fusion) по проиндексированному корпусу markdown-документов о RAG, поиске и LLM-инфраструктуре.

Используй этот инструмент, когда нужно найти релевантные документы или факты по теме или вопросу пользователя, прежде чем отвечать — вместо того, чтобы полагаться на собственные знания. Одинаково хорошо работает и для семантических запросов на естественном языке ("как оценивать качество ретривера"), и для точных терминов/аббревиатур ("RRF", "BM25"), поскольку сочетает векторный и лексический поиск.

Args: query: Запрос на естественном языке или ключевые слова. top_k: Сколько документов вернуть (по умолчанию 5, максимум 20).

Returns: Список словарей, отсортированный по убыванию релевантности — [{"doc_id": str, "title": str, "snippet": str, "score": float}, ...]. doc_id — идентификатор документа, который нужно передать в get_document(), чтобы получить его полный текст, или в rerank_results(), чтобы уточнить порядок кандидатов.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes
top_kNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provisioned, the description carries the full explanation burden. It does well by disclosing the dense+BM25 RRF behavior, a relevance-sorted return structure, and downstream integration via doc_id to get_document or rerank_results. It maybe does not explicitly state side-effect safety or permissions, but such considerations are minimal for a search operation.

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 well structured: a front-loaded explanation of the retrieval mechanism, followed by concrete usage guidance and a neat Args/Returns block. Every sentence completes the main explanation of what the tool does, when to use it, how it behaves, and what the caller receives.

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 output schema, sibling tools, and search-oriented complexity, the description provides a practically complete flow: search for candidates, receive relevant snippets and scores, then optionally pass doc_id to get_document for full content or rerank_results for reranking. This is sufficient contextual guidance for agentic use.

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?

While the schema description coverage is 0%, the description fully explains both parameters: query is a natural-language request or keywords, and top_k is the number of documents to return with a default of 5 and maximum of 20. This adds strong semantic value beyond the bare input 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?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: hybrid search over an indexed corpus of markdown documents about RAG, retrieval, and LLM infrastructure. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_document and rerank_results by making search and retrieval its primary role.

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 direction: use this tool to find relevant documents or facts before answering instead of relying on internal knowledge. It also explains suitability for semantic queries and exact terms; however, it does not explicitly describe when not to use this tool versus its siblings.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

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/q6066697/rag-mcp-server'

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