Skip to main content
Glama

search_bispecific_format_failures

Read-onlyIdempotent

Bispecific format/engineering failures.

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

C2.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as default tier behavior, pagination semantics, or result scope. It neither contradicts nor enriches the annotations, leaving the description behaviorally silent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness2/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only four words, but it is an incomplete fragment that fails to form a meaningful sentence. While it is concise in length, it is under-specified and does not earn its place. A usable description would at least include a verb, such as 'Search for bispecific format/engineering failures.'

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?

Given the tool's six-parameter schema, rich annotations, and the availability of many sibling search tools, the description is far too minimal to provide adequate context. It does not state the tool's main purpose in a complete way, nor does it hint at key behaviors like the tier filter or pagination. The schema covers parameters, but the description itself is insufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without additional inference.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with descriptions for all six parameters, including tier, limit, offset, target, outcome, and compound. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning; it only restates the topic. The baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the full semantic load.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose2/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Bispecific format/engineering failures.' is a noun phrase that essentially restates the tool name ('search_bispecific_format_failures') without providing a verb or explicit action. It adds a slight qualifier 'engineering' but does not clearly state what the tool does (e.g., 'search', 'list', 'retrieve'). While it hints at the resource, it lacks the specificity of a true purpose 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools such as 'search_failed_bispecifics' or 'search_failed_adcs'. There is no mention of preferred contexts, exclusions, or alternatives. The agent is left to infer usage 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