PubMed / MEDLINE Literature Search

search_pubmed

Search PubMed for biomedical literature.

Find research articles, reviews, and clinical studies matching your
search terms. Supports PubMed query syntax including MeSH terms,
field tags, and boolean operators.

Args:
    query: Search terms (e.g. 'diabetes prevention exercise',
        'breast cancer[MeSH] AND immunotherapy', 'COVID-19 vaccine efficacy').
    limit: Maximum results (default 20, max 100).
    sort: Sort order - 'relevance', 'date', or 'author' (default 'relevance').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Default
`sort`	No	relevance
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains the search capability but does not mention that the tool is read-only, or describe rate limits or authentication needs. The output schema covers return format, partially compensating.

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?

The description is well-structured with a clear first line summary, followed by a detailed paragraph and a clean 'Args' section. Every sentence provides necessary information without redundancy.

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?

For a search tool with three parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: purpose, supported syntax, parameter details with defaults and constraints. It is complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage, but the description thoroughly explains each parameter: 'query' with multiple examples, 'limit' with default and max, and 'sort' with options. This adds significant value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches PubMed for biomedical literature, specifying it finds research articles, reviews, and clinical studies. This differentiates it from siblings like find_related_articles, which focus on related content.

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?

The description explains when to use the tool (to search biomedical literature) and supports PubMed query syntax with examples. However, it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools or mention when not to use it.

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

All PubMed / MEDLINE Literature Search tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose with no overlap: find_related_articles finds similar papers, get_article_detail retrieves metadata, get_cited_by finds citations, search_mesh searches vocabulary, and search_pubmed performs general searches. The descriptions reinforce these distinct roles, making misselection unlikely.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with snake_case (e.g., find_related_articles, get_article_detail, search_pubmed). The naming is predictable and readable throughout, with no deviations in style or convention.

Tool Count5/5

With 5 tools, the server is well-scoped for literature search and retrieval. Each tool earns its place by covering key workflows: searching, retrieving details, finding related/citing articles, and vocabulary support. This count is neither too sparse nor bloated for the domain.

Completeness4/5

The toolset covers core PubMed operations effectively: search, retrieve details, find related/citing articles, and vocabulary lookup. A minor gap is the lack of tools for advanced filtering (e.g., by date range or journal) or batch operations, but agents can work around this with query syntax.

Resources

Need Help?