Peptide Library

Search research content

search_research

Read-onlyIdempotent

Search Peptide Library's own educational content: the site FAQ, per-peptide FAQs, published articles and free courses. Returns titles, short snippets and links with source attribution (no full text, no third-party articles). Dosing, reconstitution and injection guides, and content about buying, vendors or prices, are excluded.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Results to return (1-10).
`query`	Yes	What to look for in Peptide Library's educational content, e.g. "GLP-1 mechanism", "what is a half-life".
`types`	No	Content types to search (default: all): site FAQ, per-peptide FAQ, articles, courses.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	Yes
`query`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`results`	Yes
`disclaimer`	Yes
`retrieved_at`	Yes
`total_matches`	Yes
`unavailable_sources`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 15, 2026

removedOutput schema / properties / results / items / properties / pro_only
```
Removed value: -{
-  "type": "boolean"
-}
```

changedOutput schema / properties / results / items / required

Previous value: -[
-  "type",
-  "source_label",
-  "title",
-  "snippet",
-  "url",
-  "peptide_id",
-  "updated_at",
-  "pro_only"
-]New value: +[
+  "type",
+  "source_label",
+  "title",
+  "snippet",
+  "url",
+  "peptide_id",
+  "updated_at"
+]

First observedOct 15, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and closed-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: results are titles, short snippets and attributed links, never full text, and a defined set of subject matter is deliberately absent from the index. It stops short of noting no-result behavior or ranking/limits, but that is a minor gap.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two sentences, no filler, and the positive scope is front-loaded before the exclusions. Every clause carries information an agent needs — either what is searchable or what is deliberately not.

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?

With an output schema present, the description is not obliged to explain return fields, and it correctly focuses on corpus scope and exclusions. It omits any mention of result limits or empty-result handling, but for a read-only search tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the definition is adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%, including examples for 'query' and an enumeration for 'types', so the schema already carries parameter meaning. The description's enumeration of content types mirrors the schema's 'types' description rather than adding syntax, defaults or matching semantics beyond it.

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 precise verb ('Search') plus the exact resource ('Peptide Library's own educational content') and enumerates the four corpora it covers (site FAQ, per-peptide FAQs, articles, courses). The 'own' qualifier and the exclusion of third-party articles clearly separate it from siblings like search_peptides or get_peptide_details.

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 strong in/out-of-scope guidance: it names the excluded topics (dosing, reconstitution, injection guides, buying/vendors/prices) and notes third-party articles are not covered, which tells the agent when this tool will return nothing useful. It does not, however, name a sibling to use instead for those excluded topics, so routing is left partly to inference.

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

All Peptide Library tools Inspect

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.