Skip to main content
Glama
rm-rf-prod

ws-mcp

by rm-rf-prod
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Local

Search Any Topic

gt_search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for current best practices, documentation, and guidance on any topic without specifying a library name. Get authoritative results for web standards, security, accessibility, performance, APIs, and more.

Instructions

Search for latest best practices, docs, or guidance on ANY topic — no library name needed.

Current year: 2026. All searches are normalized to fetch 2026 content.

Works for:

  • Library best practices: "latest React patterns", "Next.js server actions"

  • Web standards: "CSS container queries", "WebSocket API", "Fetch API"

  • Security: "OWASP SQL injection prevention", "JWT security best practices", "CSP headers"

  • Accessibility: "WCAG 2.2 focus indicators", "ARIA roles reference"

  • Performance: "Core Web Vitals optimization", "LCP improvements"

  • APIs & protocols: "REST API design", "HTTP/3 vs HTTP/2", "OpenAPI 3.1"

  • Auth standards: "OAuth 2.1 PKCE", "WebAuthn passkeys", "OIDC"

  • Infrastructure: "Docker best practices", "GitHub Actions CI/CD"

  • Anything else: just ask

If the query names ONE specific library, prefer gt_resolve_library + gt_get_docs/gt_best_practices for version-accurate, registry-backed results — use gt_search for standards, cross-cutting topics, or when no library applies. For browser/runtime feature support use gt_compat; for GitHub code examples use gt_examples.

Say "use gt" or "gt search [topic]" to invoke.

Examples:

  • gt_search({ query: "latest best practices" }) — auto-detects from project context

  • gt_search({ query: "WCAG 2.2 keyboard navigation" })

  • gt_search({ query: "SQL injection prevention 2026" })

  • gt_search({ query: "CSS container queries browser support" })

  • gt_search({ query: "React Server Components patterns" })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesWhat you want to know. Can be anything: 'latest React best practices', 'WCAG 2.2 focus indicators', 'OWASP SQL injection prevention', 'CSS container queries browser support', 'JWT security', 'HTTP/3 vs HTTP/2', 'Web Workers API'. No library name required.
tokensNoMax tokens to return (default: 8000, max: 20000)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv5.2.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds that searches are normalized to 2026 content and auto-detects from project context. 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.

Conciseness4/5

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

The description is well-structured with bullet points and examples, though slightly lengthy. It could be trimmed without losing value, but it remains clear and front-loaded.

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?

For a general search tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, alternatives, behavioral traits, and examples comprehensively. No gaps identified.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage; the description adds examples and usage context but does not significantly extend meaning 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?

The description clearly states the tool is for searching any topic without needing a library name. It lists numerous examples across domains and explicitly distinguishes from siblings like gt_resolve_library, gt_compat, and gt_examples.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives: if a specific library is named, prefer gt_resolve_library + gt_get_docs/gt_best_practices; for browser/runtime features use gt_compat; for GitHub code examples use gt_examples. This covers 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