CovaSyn Chemistry Tools

covabasic_describe_structure

Explain what a structure IS, in prose — parent framework, ring system, functional groups, substituents.

Turns a SMILES into a readable chemical description rather than a table of
numbers. Useful for reports, for captioning a drawn structure, and for
checking that a structure is what you meant to draw.

style="human"     — compact, chemistry-facing narrative: the parent skeleton,
                    heteroatom positions, unsaturation, the principal
                    characteristic group, then substituents with their locants.
style="technical"  — the full naming walkthrough, including how the name was
                    assembled token by token.

Returns: `{name, paragraphs: [...], text, rules_hit, smiles, style, engine}`,
or `{error, smiles}`. `text` is the paragraphs joined for direct display.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`style`	No	human
`smiles`	Yes
`verify`	No
`api_key`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedOct 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the response shape and the error case ("{error, smiles}") and the semantics of each style, which is genuine behavioral content. However it never explains what `verify` actually does, whether an api_key is required, or any determinism/rate limits, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps for a no-annotation tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, then use cases, then a clean style breakdown and return shape. It is slightly long with the repeated return-field enumeration, but every section is scannable and earns most of its space.

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 return-value enumeration is optional padding, and the core call information (required smiles, style selection, use cases) is complete. The only real shortfall is the undocumented `verify` flag, which an agent might set or avoid without understanding its effect.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does add real meaning for `style` by spelling out the human vs technical narratives (the schema offers no enum), and `smiles` is self-evident, but `verify` and `api_key` are entirely unexplained, leaving two of four parameters opaque.

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 a specific verb+resource ("Explain what a structure IS, in prose") and names the outputs it produces (parent framework, ring system, functional groups, substituents). It implicitly contrasts with table-based siblings via "rather than a table of numbers," but never names a specific alternative such as covabasic_iupac_name or covabasic_analyze, so an agent gains clarity without 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.

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Gives concrete scenarios (reports, captioning a drawn structure, sanity-checking a drawn structure) and explicitly tells the agent how to choose between the two style values. It stops short of naming when NOT to use it or pointing to a sibling for the naming-only or numeric case.

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

All CovaSyn Chemistry Tools 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.