Skip to main content
Glama

Catalyst evidence graph

by ai.catalystproject
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Findings about a node, with their evidence strength

get_findings
Read-onlyIdempotent

The curated study findings for one node: for a compound, organism or material, what it has been shown to affect; for an outcome, which compounds have been studied against it. summary lists everything the node has findings about, one row each, across ALL its findings and not only the rows returned. Use it to see what is covered, then pass about (an id from summary, or words such as "sleep") to get the findings on one thing. Each finding carries its evidence strength, one of five named levels from strong to insufficient (strong, moderate, limited, very_limited, insufficient), the verbatim sentence it was drawn from, the paper, the population and dose, and a permalink. An evidence strength says how well the evidence supports the finding; it is not a recommendation. Always give the evidence strength with the claim, and link the permalink. An empty list means nothing has been curated yet, not that the compound does nothing.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
aboutNoOptional: only findings about this, as an id from summary (e.g. CAT:outcome/sleep-onset-latency) or words in its name (e.g. "sleep").
limitNoFindings to return, strongest evidence first.
detailNobrief (default): each finding with its claim, evidence strength, design, population, dose, quote, paper, permalink and a ready-to-quote citation. full: every recorded field.brief
node_idYesA node id from search_nodes, e.g. CHEBI:16919 (creatine).
evidence_strengthNoOptional floor: return only findings with at least this evidence strength.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / detail
      Added value: +{
+  "default": "brief",
+  "description": "brief (default): each finding with its claim, evidence strength, design, population, dose, quote, paper, permalink and a ready-to-quote citation. full: every recorded field.",
+  "enum": [
+    "brief",
+    "full"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / about
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional: only findings about this, as an id from summary (e.g. CAT:outcome/sleep-onset-latency) or words in its name (e.g. \"sleep\").",
+  "maxLength": 80,
+  "minLength": 2,
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +{}
    • addedInput schema / properties / evidence_strength
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional floor: return only findings with at least this evidence strength.",
+  "enum": [
+    "strong",
+    "moderate",
+    "limited",
+    "very_limited",
+    "insufficient"
+  ],
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Previous value: -"Findings to return, strongest grade first."New value: +"Findings to return, strongest evidence first."
  4. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations: summary spans ALL findings, not just the returned rows; an empty list means nothing curated yet rather than no effect; evidence strength is not a recommendation; and it instructs the agent to always carry the strength and permalink with the claim. These are non-obvious semantics the annotations cannot convey.

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?

Long but front-loaded: what the tool returns, then how to narrow, then what each finding carries, then the caveat about empty results. Slight redundancy (the five strength levels are listed and then re-referenced) keeps it from a 5.

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

Completeness5/5

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

No output schema exists, so the description must describe returns, and it enumerates them fully: claim, evidence strength, verbatim sentence, paper, population, dose, permalink, and a ready-to-quote citation, plus the brief/full detail distinction. Nothing needed to call or interpret this tool is missing.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning to `about` by tying it to the summary output and allowing free words like "sleep", clarifying its role in the two-step workflow. The five evidence-strength levels are restated but already enum-documented, so value is only marginally above schema.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (curated study findings for one node) and immediately disambiguates the two directions it works in: compound→what it affects, outcome→which compounds were studied against it. This distinguishes it from the singular sibling get_finding and from find_evidence.

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 an explicit workflow: call with node_id to see coverage via summary, then pass about (id or words) to narrow to one thing. It does not explicitly name or rule out siblings such as get_finding or find_evidence, so the routing is clear but not exhaustive.

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

All Catalyst evidence graph toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources