codex-mcp-server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

websearch

Read-onlyIdempotent

Execute web searches with adjustable depth and result count to obtain information for code analysis and generation tasks.

Instructions

Perform web search using Codex CLI with web search enabled

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "websearch"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`query`	Yes	The search query to execute
`numResults`	No	Number of search results to return (1-50, default: 10)
`searchDepth`	No	Search depth: basic (faster) or full (deeper analysis, default: basic)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.4.10May 30, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds minimal context about the execution environment ('using Codex CLI with web search enabled'), but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is a single concise sentence with no extraneous words. Every part earns its place.

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?

With 3 parameters well-documented in schema, no output schema, and comprehensive annotations, the description covers the essentials. However, it could provide more context about the output format or what 'Codex CLI' refers to, making it minimally adequate.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 3 parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for this dimension.

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 verb 'Perform' and resource 'web search', distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'codex' or 'help'. It's specific and unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or prerequisites. It simply states what it does.

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

Deploy Server