MCP Google Server
Provides web search capabilities using Google Custom Search API, allowing querying the entire web or specific sites and returning structured results with title, link, and snippet.
Click on "Deploy Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@MCP Google Serversearch for recent advancements in quantum computing"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
mcp-google-server A MCP Server for Google Custom Search and Webpage Reading
A Model Context Protocol server that provides web search capabilities using Google Custom Search API and webpage content extraction functionality.
Setup
Getting Google API Key and Search Engine ID
Create a Google Cloud Project:
Go to Google Cloud Console
Create a new project or select an existing one
Enable billing for your project
Enable Custom Search API:
Go to API Library
Search for "Custom Search API"
Click "Enable"
Get API Key:
Go to Credentials
Click "Create Credentials" > "API Key"
Copy your API key
(Optional) Restrict the API key to only Custom Search API
Create Custom Search Engine:
Enter the sites you want to search (use www.google.com for general web search)
Click "Create"
On the next page, click "Customize"
In the settings, enable "Search the entire web"
Copy your Search Engine ID (cx)
Related MCP server: MCP Server for Google Search
Development
Install dependencies:
npm installBuild the server:
npm run buildFor development with auto-rebuild:
npm run watchFeatures
Search Tool
Perform web searches using Google Custom Search API:
Search the entire web or specific sites
Control number of results (1-10)
Get structured results with title, link, and snippet
Webpage Reader Tool
Extract content from any webpage:
Fetch and parse webpage content
Extract page title and main text
Clean content by removing scripts and styles
Return structured data with title, text, and URL
Installation
Installing via Smithery
To install Google Custom Search Server for Claude Desktop automatically via Smithery:
npx -y @smithery/cli install @adenot/mcp-google-search --client claudeTo use with Claude Desktop, add the server config with your Google API credentials:
On MacOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
On Windows: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"google-search": {
"command": "npx",
"args": [
"-y",
"@adenot/mcp-google-search"
],
"env": {
"SMARTSEARCH_ENDPOINT": "your-endpoint-here",
"SMARTSEARCH_AK": "your-ak-here"
}
}
}
}Usage
Search Tool
{
"name": "search",
"arguments": {
"query": "your search query",
"num": 5 // optional, default is 5, max is 10
}
}Webpage Reader Tool
{
"name": "read_webpage",
"arguments": {
"url": "https://example.com"
}
}Example response from webpage reader:
{
"title": "Example Domain",
"text": "Extracted and cleaned webpage content...",
"url": "https://example.com"
}Debugging
Since MCP servers communicate over stdio, debugging can be challenging. We recommend using the MCP Inspector, which is available as a package script:
npm run inspectorThe Inspector will provide a URL to access debugging tools in your browser.
Available Tools
2 toolsread_webpageA
Fetch and extract text content from a webpage
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | URL of the webpage to read |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It only states basic purpose without mentioning rate limits, authentication, dynamic content handling, or error responses.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
Single sentence, front-loaded with action, no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but lacks details on handling of large pages, timeouts, or what 'text content' entails (e.g., stripping HTML).
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema coverage is 100% (single 'url' parameter described), so baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, such as URL format or protocol support.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
Description clearly states the action ('Fetch and extract') and the resource ('text content from a webpage'), distinguishing it from sibling tool 'search' which is for querying.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling 'search' suggests a different purpose, but the description does not clarify contexts or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
searchC
Perform a web search query
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query | |
| num | No | Number of results (1-10) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the action, omitting details such as result format, rate limits, data sources, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool with no structural safety hints.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single, straightforward sentence with no extraneous information. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simple purpose.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description is too minimal to be considered complete. It does not address limitations, result handling, or how to interpret outputs, leaving gaps for an AI agent.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate per the guidelines.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description 'Perform a web search query' clearly states the action and resource, but does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'read_webpage', which likely fetches content from a single URL. A more specific purpose, such as indicating it searches the entire web, would improve clarity.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
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 the sibling tool 'read_webpage'. There is no mention of when a web search is appropriate or when to avoid it, leaving the agent without decision-making context.
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.
2 tool updates
- First observed
read_webpage - First observed
search
TDQS
Scored across 2 tools
The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: read_webpage fetches and extracts text from a specific URL, while search performs a web search query. There is no overlap or ambiguity between these functions, making it easy for an agent to select the appropriate tool.
Both tools follow a consistent verb-based naming pattern (read_webpage, search) with clear, descriptive names. They use snake_case uniformly, and the verbs accurately reflect their actions without deviation.
With only 2 tools, the server feels thin for a 'Google Server' domain, which typically involves broader functionality like email, calendar, or drive operations. While the tools are useful, the count is too low to adequately cover the implied scope, suggesting an incomplete or narrowly focused implementation.
Given the server name 'MCP Google Server', there are significant gaps in coverage, such as missing tools for Google services like Gmail, Calendar, Drive, or authentication. The current tools only handle web-related tasks, making the surface severely incomplete for the expected domain.
Maintenance
Related MCP Connectors
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
MCP server for Google search results via SERP API
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Search remote Model Context Protocol servers and tools discovered by BuiltWith, without an API key.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables LLMs to perform web searches using Google's Custom Search API through a standardized interface.147MIT
- FlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides web search capabilities using Google Custom Search API and webpage content extraction functionality.26 npm2-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables AI assistants to perform web searches using Google Search API, returning up to 20 search results in JSON format.2Apache 2.0
- AlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server providing web search capabilities using Google Custom Search API and webpage content extraction functionality.2MIT