Skip to main content
Glama
smeet666

mcp-recipes

Search every recipe source at once

search_recipes
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search all recipe sources at once for a dish or ingredient and get a merged list with per-source results and source IDs for further lookup.

Instructions

Search every recipe source this server reads, at the same time, for a dish or an ingredient, and get one merged list. Each row carries the id get_recipe takes, and that id names the source it came from, so nothing has to be guessed afterwards. The sources are written in different languages and count their own results differently, so 'per_source' says what each one answered, what its own number means, and names any that failed. A short list is never evidence of what exists. Some sources keep recipes and reference pages together, so a row can be a page about an ingredient rather than a recipe using it. Only get_recipe can tell them apart, and it says what it read off the page. The query goes to each source's own search as free text. There is no filtering: a word naming a diet, a time or a calorie count matches only where that source's index happens to carry it. Ask in a whole sentence if that is the question. These indexes answer the words they are handed, so a sentence is also sent as the words naming the dish and as the dish word alone, and the rows are the union; 'per_source' lists every wording and what it returned. What the question says the recipe must not hold is set aside from those shorter wordings rather than searched for, and named back in the notes: a negation, an allergy stated as one, a diet named in one word, and the number of people at the table. No source filters on any of it, so open a row with get_recipe and read the ingredient list before calling it suitable. A condition is read with the food on whichever side of it the sentence put one, so 'allergique aux noix' and 'peanut allergy' both name the nut. Where a sentence puts a food on neither side, the notes say a condition was stated and that its food was not read, because naming the wrong word would hide a dish and search for the food being avoided at once. Rows are interleaved one source at a time rather than ranked, because the sources share no score that could order them against each other.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesA dish or an ingredient, in any of the languages the sources publish in.
fan_outNoWhether a question may also be sent in shorter wordings derived from it. On, because these indexes answer the words they are handed: a question written as a sentence comes back empty from a corpus holding several of the dish. Turn it off to send exactly the words typed; 'per_source' then names the wordings that were withheld.
sourcesNoSources to ask, by id. Left out, they are all asked, which is the point of this tool. The ids are the ones 'per_source' reports.
limit_per_sourceNoRows to take from each source, so one source cannot fill the whole list.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
notesYes
orderYesHow the list was built, in words.
queryYes
resultsYes
per_sourceYes
result_countYesRows in this answer, across every source.
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, openWorld, idempotent), it reveals per-source language/count differences, the meaning of 'per_source', the possibility of reference pages, the fan_out union behavior, negation/allergy handling, and interleaved ordering. This is extensive behavioral disclosure that goes far beyond the structured metadata.

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 front-loaded with the purpose and every sentence adds value, but it is a single dense paragraph that could benefit from logical section breaks (e.g., fan_out, per_source, limitations). Given the tool's complexity, the verbosity is justified, but structure could be improved.

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?

The description covers language differences, per_source failure reporting, false-negative warnings, page-type ambiguity, fan_out mechanics, negation handling, and ranking behavior. With an output schema present and annotations covering safety, it is remarkably complete for a complex search tool.

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?

The schema already covers all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful extra context for query (sent as free text with no filtering), fan_out (additional wordings and union results), and sources (ids from per_source). It does not add much for limit_per_source, but the schema already explains it adequately.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search every recipe source this server reads, at the same time, for a dish or an ingredient, and get one merged list.' This clearly states the tool's function and differentiates it from the sibling get_recipe by noting that each row carries the id get_recipe takes, implying search is the discovery step.

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?

It explicitly instructs when to use get_recipe instead: 'open a row with get_recipe and read the ingredient list before calling it suitable.' It also explains when to turn fan_out off, and warns that a short list is not evidence. These are clear, actionable usage guidelines.

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/smeet666/mcp-recipes'

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