Skip to main content
Glama
testusuke

GPT Research MCP Server

by testusuke

research

Answer questions and solve complex problems by searching the web with AI-powered research capabilities, providing results with citations and references.

Instructions

Ask questions, search for information, or consult about complex problems in English.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • main.py:35-68 (handler)
    The handler function for the 'research' tool. It uses an OpenAI client to perform a web search via the responses.create API with the web_search tool, processes the response, extracts citations from annotations, and formats the output with sources.
    @mcp.tool
    def research(query: str) -> str:
        """
        Ask questions, search for information, or consult about complex problems in English.
        """
        # Responses API で Web Search を実行
        response = client.responses.create(
            model="gpt-5.1",
            tools=[
                {
                    "type": "web_search",
                    "search_context_size": "medium",  # low/medium/high
                }
            ],
            input=query,
        )
    
        # レスポンステキストを取得
        result_text = response.output_text
    
        # 引用情報を抽出してフォーマット
        citations = []
        for item in response.output:
            if hasattr(item, 'type') and item.type == "message":
                for content in item.content:
                    if hasattr(content, 'annotations'):
                        for annotation in content.annotations:
                            citations.append(f"- [{annotation.title}]({annotation.url})")
    
        # 結果と引用を結合
        if citations:
            result_text += "\n\n## Sources\n" + "\n".join(citations)
    
        return result_text
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool can 'ask questions, search for information, or consult,' but fails to describe key traits like whether it performs read-only operations, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output entails. This leaves significant gaps in understanding how the tool behaves beyond its basic purpose.

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 concise and front-loaded in a single sentence, with no wasted words. It efficiently states the tool's purpose and language requirement. However, it could be more structured by separating key points, but its brevity is appropriate given the simple tool nature.

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 the tool's complexity is low (1 parameter, no siblings) and an output schema exists (which should cover return values), the description is somewhat complete but has gaps. It covers the basic purpose and language, but lacks behavioral details and parameter guidance. With no annotations, it should do more to compensate, making it minimally adequate but not fully helpful.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema provides no details about the 'query' parameter. The description adds minimal semantics by implying the query should be in English and related to questions or complex problems, but it doesn't specify format, constraints, or examples. This is insufficient to compensate for the low schema coverage, resulting in poor parameter understanding.

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 tool's purpose as 'Ask questions, search for information, or consult about complex problems in English,' which is clear but vague. It specifies the action (ask/search/consult) and language (English) but lacks specificity about what resources or domains it operates on, and with no siblings, differentiation is not needed. However, 'research' as a name is broad, and the description doesn't fully clarify its scope beyond general information-seeking.

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?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions 'complex problems' and 'English,' which imply some context, but there are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or comparisons to other tools. With no sibling tools, the lack of guidance is less critical, but it still offers minimal direction for effective usage.

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/testusuke/gpt-research-mcp'

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