web_searchSearch Chinese web content by aggregating results from Baidu, Sogou, and Bing CN. Get relevant pages for your query with configurable language and result count.
中文网页搜索，聚合百度/搜狗/Bing CN 等引擎（依赖本地 SearXNG localhost:8080）。
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | 搜索关键词，支持中文 | |
| language | No | 搜索语言，默认 zh-CN，可选 en / all | zh-CN |
| num_results | No | 返回结果数量，默认 10 |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that the tool depends on a local SearXNG instance and aggregates multiple engines, which is important operational context. It does not discuss failure behavior, latency, or result format, but the presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is a single compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose and immediately follows with the key infrastructure dependency. Every element earns its place, though it is slightly sparse in terms of structured guidance.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a tool with three simple parameters, full schema coverage, and an output schema, the description is mostly adequate. It includes the critical local-service dependency and clarifies the search scope, but it leaves usage-vs-alternative guidance and potential failure conditions implicit.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already well documented in the schema. The description adds little beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions, only reinforcing the Chinese-language context, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the tool performs Chinese web search and aggregates Baidu/Sogou/Bing CN, which distinguishes it from general-purpose search siblings like exa_search or domain-specific tools like arxiv_search. It uses a specific verb and resource, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with every sibling.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase '中文网页搜索' implies the tool is appropriate for Chinese-language web queries, and the explicit dependency on local SearXNG at localhost:8080 signals an important prerequisite. However, it does not mention when to prefer this over alternatives such as exa_search or when it should not be used.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.