Skip to main content
Glama
v587d

Insights Knowledge Base MCP Server

by v587d

search_content_detail

Search report details by combining keywords, title, content, publisher, and date range. Returns matching pages with full content, keywords, and download links.

Instructions

该方法用于查询符合多条件组合的报告详情页面。LLM需根据用户输入的消息(user_message)提炼出以下参数。 ⚠️注意:当LLM引用该方法返回的结果时,必须用markdown格式明确、醒目告知用户引自哪篇报告和具体访问地址! 比如“观点引自《21世纪CEO的成功法则》第10、16页。(查看完整报告)[<如果"download_url"不为空,填入download_url>]” !!!注意每份报告单独列举 download_url,不要笼统指向某一个可能不存在的地址。

参数:
    keywords: List[str] = None, 报告详情页的关键词。
    title: str = "", 报告详情页标题包含词。
    content: str = "", 报告详情页内容包含词。
    publisher: str = "", 报告发布者。
    start_date: Optional[datetime] = None, 报告查询开始日期。
    end_date: Optional[datetime] = None, 报告查询结束日期。
    match_logic: str = "OR", 匹配逻辑。"OR" 或者 "AND",二选一,**优先用 "OR"**。
    page_index: int = 1, 页码,默认仅显示第一页。

返回:
    results:报告详情
      - file_name: 详情页来自于哪份报告名
      - page_number: 页码
      - page_abstract: 摘要
      - page_content: 完整内容
      - page_keywords: 详情页关键词
      - published_by: 报告发布机构
      - published_date:报告发布日期
      - local_path: 报告存放于本地地址
      - download_url: 报告网络链接
      - matched_keywords: 匹配关键词组
    current_page:当前页码。⚠️当前页码小于总页码时,LLM需在结尾处提示用户可输入“下一页”查询更多记录。
    total_pages: 总页数
    total_matches: 总匹配记录条数

LLM需将该方法返回结果组织成通畅的语言传达给用户。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
titleNo
contentNo
end_dateNo
keywordsNo
publisherNo
page_indexNo
start_dateNo
match_logicNoOR
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It explains the search behavior, pagination (current_page, total_pages), and the need to handle 'next page' prompts. It also notes the match_logic preference for 'OR'. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, but as a read-only search, this is adequate.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

The description is excessively long and mixes parameter documentation with LLM instructions (citation format, pagination prompting). While all content is valuable, it is not concise and could be restructured to separate behavioral guidelines from parameter details.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (8 parameters, no output schema), the description covers return fields, pagination behavior, and citation requirements. It lacks details on error handling or empty results, but overall is fairly complete for invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description compensates fully by explaining each parameter's purpose, type, default, and usage notes (e.g., match_logic choices, keywords as list). It adds significant value beyond the bare schema, making parameters self-explanatory.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: querying report detail pages with multiple condition combinations. It uses a specific verb (查询) and resource (报告详情页面). While it does not explicitly distinguish from siblings, the purpose is distinct from search_report_profile and get_similar_content_by_rag.

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 implies usage based on user input to extract parameters and provides detailed instructions for presenting results (citation, pagination). However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or compare to alternatives, lacking explicit usage context.

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/v587d/InsightsLibrary'

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