Pixabay MCP Server
The Pixabay MCP Server allows you to search for images on Pixabay via a Model Context Protocol server.
Search Images: Search using the
search_pixabay_imagestool with a required query stringFilter Results: Customize by image type (photo, illustration, vector), orientation (horizontal, vertical), and results per page (3-200)
Formatted Output: Receive structured results with image URLs and metadata
Configuration: Configure with a Pixabay API key and enable safe search
Error Handling: Built-in handling for API issues and invalid parameters
Provides tools for searching images on Pixabay, returning formatted results with image URLs and metadata, with options to filter by image type and orientation.
Click on "Install Server".
Wait a few minutes for the server to deploy. Once ready, it will show a "Started" state.
In the chat, type
@followed by the MCP server name and your instructions, e.g., "@Pixabay MCP Serversearch for sunset photos with horizontal orientation"
That's it! The server will respond to your query, and you can continue using it as needed.
Here is a step-by-step guide with screenshots.
pixabay-mcp MCP Server
A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for Pixabay image and video search with structured results & runtime validation.
This TypeScript MCP server exposes Pixabay search tools over stdio so AI assistants / agents can retrieve media safely and reliably.
Highlights:
Image & video search tools (Pixabay official API)
Runtime argument validation (enums, ranges, semantic checks)
Consistent error logging without leaking sensitive keys
Planned structured JSON payloads for easier downstream automation (see Roadmap)
Features
Tools
search_pixabay_images
Required:
query(string)Optional:
image_type(all|photo|illustration|vector),orientation(all|horizontal|vertical),per_page(3-200)Returns: human-readable text block (current) + (planned) structured JSON array of hits
search_pixabay_videos
Required:
queryOptional:
video_type(all|film|animation),orientation,per_page(3-200),min_duration,max_durationReturns: human-readable text block + (planned) structured JSON with duration & URLs
Configuration
Environment variables:
Name | Required | Default | Description |
| Yes | - | Your Pixabay API key (images & videos) |
| No | 10000 (planned) | Request timeout once feature lands |
| No | 0 (planned) | Number of retry attempts for transient network errors |
Notes:
Safe search is enabled by default.
Keys are never echoed back in structured errors or logs.
Related MCP server: Lorem Ipsum MCP Server
Usage Examples
Current (text only response excerpt):
Found 120 images for "cat":
- cat, pet, animal (User: Alice): https://.../medium1.jpg
- kitten, cute (User: Bob): https://.../medium2.jpgPlanned structured result (Roadmap v0.4+):
{
"content": [
{ "type": "text", "text": "Found 120 images for \"cat\":\n- ..." },
{
"type": "json",
"data": {
"query": "cat",
"totalHits": 120,
"page": 1,
"perPage": 20,
"hits": [
{ "id": 123, "tags": ["cat","animal"], "user": "Alice", "previewURL": "...", "webformatURL": "...", "largeImageURL": "..." }
]
}
}
]
}Error response (planned shape):
{
"content": [{ "type": "text", "text": "Pixabay API error: 400 ..." }],
"isError": true,
"metadata": { "status": 400, "code": "UPSTREAM_BAD_REQUEST", "hint": "Check API key or parameters" }
}Development
Install dependencies:
npm installBuild the server:
npm run buildWatch mode:
npm run watchInstallation
Option 1: Using npx (Recommended)
Add this to your Claude Desktop configuration:
On MacOS: ~/Library/Application Support/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
On Windows: %APPDATA%/Claude/claude_desktop_config.json
{
"mcpServers": {
"pixabay-mcp": {
"command": "npx",
"args": ["pixabay-mcp@latest"],
"env": {
"PIXABAY_API_KEY": "your_api_key_here"
}
}
}
}Option 2: Local Installation
Clone and build the project:
git clone https://github.com/zym9863/pixabay-mcp.git
cd pixabay-mcp
npm install
npm run buildAdd the server config:
{
"mcpServers": {
"pixabay-mcp": {
"command": "/path/to/pixabay-mcp/build/index.js",
"env": {
"PIXABAY_API_KEY": "your_api_key_here"
}
}
}
}API Key Setup
Get your Pixabay API key from https://pixabay.com/api/docs/ and set it in the configuration above. The same key grants access to both image and video endpoints.
Debugging
Since MCP servers communicate over stdio, debugging can be challenging. We recommend using the MCP Inspector, which is available as a package script:
npm run inspectorThe Inspector will provide a URL to access debugging tools in your browser.
Roadmap (Condensed)
Version | Focus | Key Items |
v0.4 | Structured & Reliability | JSON payload, timeout, structured errors |
v0.5 | UX & Pagination | page/order params, limited retry, modular refactor, tests |
v0.6 | Multi-source Exploration | Evaluate integrating Unsplash/Pexels abstraction |
See product.md for full backlog & prioritization.
Contributing
Planned contributions welcome once tests & module split land (v0.5 target). Feel free to open issues for API shape / schema suggestions.
License
MIT
Disclaimer
This project is not affiliated with Pixabay. Respect Pixabay's Terms of Service and rate limits.
Available Tools
2 toolssearch_pixabay_imagesC
Search for images on Pixabay
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query terms | |
| image_type | No | Filter results by image type | all |
| orientation | No | Filter results by image orientation | all |
| per_page | No | Number of results per page (3-200) |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Search for') but doesn't describe any behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, pagination behavior, or what the response looks like. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it operates.
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, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any unnecessary words. It's appropriately sized and front-loaded, making it easy to understand at a glance. Every word earns its place.
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?
Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a search tool with 4 parameters. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like response format, error handling, or usage constraints. While the schema handles parameters well, the overall context for proper tool invocation is insufficient.
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?
The input schema has 100% description coverage, with all parameters well-documented in the schema itself. The description doesn't add any meaning beyond what the schema provides—it doesn't explain parameter interactions, default behaviors, or usage examples. This meets the baseline of 3 since the schema does the heavy lifting.
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 action ('Search for') and resource ('images on Pixabay'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'search_pixabay_videos' by specifying images, though it doesn't explicitly contrast them. The description is specific but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.
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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention the sibling tool 'search_pixabay_videos' or any other potential alternatives, nor does it provide context about appropriate use cases or exclusions. The user must infer usage from the tool name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
search_pixabay_videosC
Search for videos on Pixabay
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| query | Yes | Search query terms | |
| video_type | No | Filter results by video type | all |
| orientation | No | Filter results by video orientation | all |
| per_page | No | Number of results per page (3-200) | |
| min_duration | No | Minimum video duration in seconds | |
| max_duration | No | Maximum video duration in seconds |
TDQS
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but only states the basic action. It doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, error handling, or what the search results look like (e.g., format, fields). For a search tool with no annotations, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.
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, efficient sentence with no wasted words, making it easy to parse and front-loaded with the core purpose. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward search tool.
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?
Given the tool's complexity (6 parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, output format, and usage context, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand how to invoke and interpret results without relying heavily on the schema alone.
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?
The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the input schema, which has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all 6 parameters. Since the schema fully documents parameters, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate, as the description doesn't compensate but also doesn't detract.
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 action ('Search for') and resource ('videos on Pixabay'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from its sibling tool 'search_pixabay_images' beyond the resource type, which is implied but not stated.
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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as its sibling 'search_pixabay_images' for image searches. There's no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving usage entirely to inference from the tool name and parameters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
TDQS
The two tools have perfectly distinct purposes: one searches for images and the other searches for videos on Pixabay. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them, making it trivial for an agent to choose the correct tool based on the desired media type.
Both tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with 'search_pixabay_' as a prefix, followed by the media type ('images' or 'videos'). This naming convention is clear, predictable, and uniform across all tools in the set.
With only two tools, the server feels thin for a media search domain, as it lacks operations for retrieving details, downloading, or managing favorites. However, it is reasonable for a minimal search-focused interface, though agents might need workarounds for extended functionality.
The tool set is severely incomplete for a Pixabay integration, covering only search operations. There are significant gaps, such as no tools for getting image/video details, downloading media, or handling user accounts, which limits agent workflows and could lead to failures in broader tasks.
Maintenance
Resources
Unclaimed servers have limited discoverability.
Looking for Admin?
If you are the server author, to access and configure the admin panel.
Related MCP Connectors
A Model Context Protocol server for Wix AI tools
A comprehensive Model Context Protocol (MCP) server that enables AI assistants to interact with yo…
Search and browse every MCP server in the Model Context Protocol registry.
The Mercado Pago MCP Server implements the Model Context Protocol to provide AI agents and LLMs with access to Mercado Pago's APIs and tools within compatible development environments. It acts as an intermediary that translates Mercado Pago resources into executable functions (tools) that AI applications can invoke to perform actions and automate flows. The server simplifies integration, enables using documentation to implement or improve code, and optimizes operations through natural language interactions without manual implementations.
Related MCP Servers
- AlicenseDqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables searching for similar images by text description, integrating Inspire's backend image search capabilities with LLM interfaces like Claude Desktop.13GPL 3.0
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that enables image generation and retrieval from picsum.photos with customizable parameters like dimensions, filters, and output formats.1
- FlicenseBqualityDmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that provides access to the Pexels API for searching and retrieving photos, videos, and collections.820
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceA Model Context Protocol server that exposes Pexels API tools for searching and retrieving free stock photos, videos, and curated collections, enabling AI agents to incorporate royalty-free media directly from chat.291452MIT
Latest Blog Posts
- Who's Calling? MCP Hosts Are an Identity Blind Spot (And the Spec Knows It)By Om-Shree-0709 on .mcpAgent IdentityOAuth 2.1
- Your AI Chatbot Just Exposed Your CEO's Salary to an InternBy Om-Shree-0709 on .Agent IdentityMCP SecurityOAuth Delegation
- Why MCP Servers Need Execution Sandboxing (And Why Your Current Stack Isn't Enough)By Om-Shree-0709 on .Agentic AiPrompt InjectionWebAssembly
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/zym9863/pixabay-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server