Skip to main content
Glama
srigi

Google Images Search MCP

by srigi
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
TypeScript
Hybrid

Server Quality Checklist

58%
Profile completionA complete profile improves this server's visibility in search results.

  • Latest release: v1.0.0

  • Disambiguation5/5

    The two tools have clearly distinct purposes: search_image retrieves images online, persist_image saves a specific image from a URL. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.

    Naming Consistency5/5

    Both tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern (search_image, persist_image) using snake_case, which is predictable and clear.

    Tool Count3/5

    With only 2 tools, the set is minimal for a search-and-persist workflow. While it covers the core actions, it feels slightly thin compared to typical server scopes of 3-15 tools.

    Completeness4/5

    The tools cover the essential workflow: search for images and persist a chosen image. No obvious gaps for the stated purpose, though additional functions like listing persisted images or metadata retrieval could be useful.

  • Average 3.2/5 across 2 of 2 tools scored. Lowest: 2.5/5.

    See the Tool Scores section below for per-tool breakdowns.

    • 0 of 1 community issues answered or closed in the last 6 months
    • 0 commits in the last 12 weeks
    • Last stable release on
    • No critical vulnerability alerts
    • No high-severity vulnerability alerts
    • No code scanning findings
    • CI is failing

  • This repository is licensed under MIT License.

  • This repository includes a README.md file.

  • No tool usage detected in the last 30 days. Usage tracking helps demonstrate server value.

    Tip: use the "Try in Browser" feature on the server page to seed initial usage.

  • Add a glama.json file to provide metadata about your server.

  • If you are the author, simply .

    If the server belongs to an organization, first add glama.json to the root of your repository:

    {
  "$schema": "https://glama.ai/mcp/schemas/server.json",
  "maintainers": [
    "your-github-username"
  ]
}

    Then . Browse examples.

  • Add related servers to improve discoverability.

How to sync the server with GitHub?

Servers are automatically synced at least once per day, but you can also sync manually at any time to instantly update the server profile.

To manually sync the server, click the "Sync Server" button in the MCP server admin interface.

How is the quality score calculated?

The overall quality score combines two components: Tool Definition Quality (70%) and Server Coherence (30%).

Tool Definition Quality measures how well each tool describes itself to AI agents. Every tool is scored 1–5 across six dimensions: Purpose Clarity (25%), Usage Guidelines (20%), Behavioral Transparency (20%), Parameter Semantics (15%), Conciseness & Structure (10%), and Contextual Completeness (10%). The server-level definition quality score is calculated as 60% mean TDQS + 40% minimum TDQS, so a single poorly described tool pulls the score down.

Server Coherence evaluates how well the tools work together as a set, scoring four dimensions equally: Disambiguation (can agents tell tools apart?), Naming Consistency, Tool Count Appropriateness, and Completeness (are there gaps in the tool surface?).

Tiers are derived from the overall score: A (≥3.5), B (≥3.0), C (≥2.0), D (≥1.0), F (<1.0). B and above is considered passing.

Tool Scores

  • Behavior2/5

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

    No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral details such as whether the tool performs side effects, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The description only says 'search', which is insufficient without annotations.

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

    Conciseness3/5

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

    The description is a single short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure and detail. It is not verbose, but it could be more informative without being overly long.

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

    Completeness2/5

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

    Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about return values, error handling, or usage examples. It does not, leaving the agent with minimal guidance.

    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?

    The input schema provides 100% description coverage for all four parameters, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema.

    Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

    Purpose3/5

    Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

    The description states the verb 'search' and resource 'image(s) online', but lacks specificity about what is returned (e.g., URLs, metadata) and does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'persist_image', which likely handles storage.

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

    Usage Guidelines2/5

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

    No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling tool 'persist_image' or any other alternatives. The description does not mention context or prerequisites.

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

  • Behavior3/5

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

    The description discloses one behavioral trait: automatic creation of targetPath if it does not exist. However, it does not mention other important behaviors such as overwrite policy, invalid URL handling, file naming, permissions, or rate limits. With no annotations provided, this is a moderate gap.

    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 a single sentence and concise, but could be more structured to improve readability. It states the action and a key behavior, but lacks separate sections for usage, behavior, and return.

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

    Completeness3/5

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

    Given there is no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns (e.g., success message or path). It also does not cover error scenarios like invalid URL or insufficient permissions. The description is adequate but not complete.

    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 input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds value by clarifying that targetPath is relative to the workspace and that the directory is created automatically if missing, which goes 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 stores an image from a URL to a folder relative to the workspace, using a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes it from the sibling 'search_image' which searches for images.

    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 description tells when to use the tool (store image from URL) but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools like 'search_image' for searching. No prerequisites or context are described.

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

GitHub Badge

Glama performs regular codebase and documentation scans to:

  • Confirm that the MCP server is working as expected.
  • Confirm that there are no obvious security issues.
  • Evaluate tool definition quality.

Our badge communicates server capabilities, safety, and installation instructions.

Card Badge

mcp-google-images-search MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

Score Badge

mcp-google-images-search MCP server

Copy to your README.md:

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/srigi/mcp-google-images-search'

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