Zearch MCP

Official

by zearchcomputer

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

TypeScript

Hybrid

Get a research run

get_run

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a Zearch run by ID to retrieve its answer, sources, verification, and status. Use it to check a queued Reverse engineer run or reopen an earlier answer.

Instructions

Fetch one of your Zearch runs by id: its answer, sources, verification and status. Use it to check on a queued Reverse engineer run, or to reopen an earlier answer. Free.

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": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "get_run"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	The run id returned by research or list_runs.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes
`mode`	No
`error`	No
`query`	No
`answer`	No	Markdown with [n] citations.
`object`	No
`status`	Yes	pending, streaming, complete, error, interrupted or redacted.
`created`	No
`sources`	No
`updated`	No
`followups`	No
`parent_id`	No
`timing_ms`	No
`answer_type`	No	verified: every paragraph passed Jev. excerpt: the selected source passage, because no draft could be supported.
`verification`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description's real additions are that queued runs can be polled this way and that the call is "Free" (no credit cost) — useful, but nothing about partial results for in-flight runs or what status values mean.

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?

Two front-loaded sentences with no filler, and the cost note is brief and placed last. The enumeration of return fields (answer, sources, verification, status) is somewhat redundant given the tool has an output schema, a minor waste.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema and full annotation coverage, the description supplies the missing pieces: when to call it and that it costs nothing. Only the meaning of a queued run's response is left unaddressed, which is minor.

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% and the id pattern plus provenance ("returned by research or list_runs") are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces ownership scoping ("your ... runs") but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond what the schema provides.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Fetch one of your Zearch runs by id") plus what comes back (answer, sources, verification, status), which makes the single-run scope obvious against a listing tool. It stops just short of naming list_runs explicitly as the sibling it is not, leaving that routing to inference.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives two concrete when-to-use cases: polling a queued Reverse engineer run and reopening an earlier answer. No when-not guidance or explicit named alternative (e.g. use list_runs to find an id first), but the context needed to act is present.

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

Deploy Server