Skip to main content
Glama
tky0065

springdocs-mcp

by tky0065
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

search_spring_docs

Search Spring Boot documentation by keywords, filter by doc type or version, and retrieve relevant results.

Instructions

Recherche dans la documentation Spring Boot avec des mots-clés

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNoNombre maximum de résultats à retourner
queryYesLes mots-clés à rechercher dans la documentation
docTypeNoType de documentation à rechercher. `content` = recherche plein texte (classement BM25) dans les pages déjà lues par le serveur (get_spring_project, get_spring_reference, get_spring_guide) ; inclus dans `all`.all
versionNoVersion de la documentation de référence Spring Boot (ex. '3.4' ou '3.4.2' ; le patch est ignoré ; 'current' ou absent = dernière). Ne s'applique qu'à la partie référence (et aux pages de référence Boot de la recherche plein texte) : les guides et les projets ne sont pas versionnés et ignorent ce paramètre.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv1.4.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / docType / description
      Previous value: -"Type de documentation à rechercher"New value: +"Type de documentation à rechercher. `content` = recherche plein texte (classement BM25) dans les pages déjà lues par le serveur (get_spring_project, get_spring_reference, get_spring_guide) ; inclus dans `all`."
    • changedInput schema / properties / docType / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "guides",
-  "reference",
-  "api",
-  "all"
-]New value: +[
+  "guides",
+  "reference",
+  "projects",
+  "content",
+  "all"
+]
    • addedInput schema / properties / query / maxLength
      Added value: +200
    • addedInput schema / properties / version
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Version de la documentation de référence Spring Boot (ex. '3.4' ou '3.4.2' ; le patch est ignoré ; 'current' ou absent = dernière). Ne s'applique qu'à la partie référence (et aux pages de référence Boot de la recherche plein texte) : les guides et les projets ne sont pas versionnés et ignorent ce paramètre.",
+  "maxLength": 20,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observedv1.2.8

TDQS

C2.8/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, yet it says nothing about return format, ranking, result limits, or server state. Some behavioral context (BM25 ranking, searching previously read pages, version scoping) lives only in the schema parameter descriptions, not in the tool description itself.

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?

A single short sentence with no waste, but also no structure or front-loaded scoping detail. It is adequately sized yet too thin to convey much, landing at the minimum-viable level.

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?

No output schema and no annotations, so the agent must rely entirely on the description and schema. For a 4-parameter search tool with a version-sensitive docType, the description omits return values, ranking behavior, pagination and sibling selection criteria, leaving meaningful gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the schema descriptions are notably rich (docType explains BM25/full-text over already-read pages; version explains patch handling and scope). The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Recherche dans la documentation Spring Boot avec des mots-clés'), so the agent knows it is a keyword search over Spring Boot docs. However, it gives no differentiation from the many sibling search tools (search_spring_concepts, search_spring_ecosystem, search_spring_projects), which is a real ambiguity given the overlap.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling search tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The docType enum hints that the tool spans guides/reference/projects/content, but the description does not turn that into when-to-use advice.

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