Skip to main content
Glama

search_adc_linker_failures

Read-onlyIdempotent

ADC failures attributed to linker chemistry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tierNoConfidence tier. 'curated' (default) returns the credible layer; 'all' also includes high-volume screening-grade rows (PubChem HTS inactives, CRISPR non-essential tails).curated
limitNoMaximum number of findings to return (1–100, default 25).
offsetNoNumber of findings to skip before this page, for pagination (default 0).
targetNoUniProt accession or gene symbol
outcomeNooutcome filter (inactive, failed_safety, terminated, …)
compoundNocompound name, ChEMBL ID, or InChIKey

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
findingsNoMatching negative findings (same shape as the REST /findings endpoint).
has_moreNoTrue when more results exist beyond this page.
coverage_noteNoHonest coverage caveat for thin Phase-1 modalities (present only when relevant).
query_metadataYesEcho of the resolved query — tool, limit, offset, and any applied presets.
returned_countNoFindings returned in this page.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / limit / description
      Added value: +"Maximum number of findings to return (1–100, default 25)."
    • addedInput schema / properties / offset / description
      Added value: +"Number of findings to skip before this page, for pagination (default 0)."
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
      +  "properties": {
      +    "coverage_note": {
      +      "description": "Honest coverage caveat for thin Phase-1 modalities (present only when relevant).",
      +      "type": "string"
      +    },
      +    "findings": {
      +      "description": "Matching negative findings (same shape as the REST /findings endpoint).",
      +      "items": {
      +        "type": "object"
      +      },
      +      "type": "array"
      +    },
      +    "has_more": {
      +      "description": "True when more results exist beyond this page.",
      +      "type": "boolean"
      +    },
      +    "query_metadata": {
      +      "description": "Echo of the resolved query — tool, limit, offset, and any applied presets.",
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    "returned_count": {
      +      "description": "Findings returned in this page.",
      +      "type": "integer"
      +    }
      +  },
      +  "required": [
      +    "query_metadata"
      +  ],
      +  "type": "object"
      +}
  2. First observed

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false). The description adds a scoping constraint ('attributed to linker chemistry') but does not disclose pagination behavior, tier semantics, or how attribution is determined. This is analogous to the get_calls example where a scope constraint earns a 3.

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?

The description is a single, short sentence that efficiently communicates the core subject and is well front-loaded. It is not verbose, but it is arguably too sparse and lacks a verb to fully anchor the action.

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

Completeness2/5

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

With 6 parameters, an output schema, and dozens of closely related sibling tools, this one-sentence description leaves significant gaps. It does not explain the curated vs all confidence tier, what qualifies as 'attributed to linker chemistry', or how this tool differs from search_failed_adcs. The output schema covers return shape but not selection context.

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% with detailed descriptions for all six parameters (tier, limit, offset, target, outcome, compound), so the schema carries the full parameter burden. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the baseline 3 applies.

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 the resource (ADC failures) and the specific attribute (linker chemistry), which distinguishes it from the broader sibling search_failed_adcs. However, it lacks an explicit action verb like 'search' or 'list', making it a noun phrase rather than a clear operational statement.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

No guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling search_*_failure tools. It does not mention alternatives, prerequisites, or typical use cases, leaving the agent to infer from the name alone.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources