Psychedelics Knowledge Graph

search_papers

Search papers: OR within lists, AND across fields; subject/object IDs match the same relationship.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "search_papers"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`dois`	No
`limit`	No
`query`	No
`cursor`	No
`domains`	No
`year_to`	No
`paper_ids`	No
`year_from`	No
`author_ids`	No
`object_ids`	No
`concept_ids`	No
`paper_types`	No
`subject_ids`	No
`author_names`	No
`object_kinds`	No
`object_labels`	No
`subject_kinds`	No
`paper_subtypes`	No
`relation_types`	No
`subject_labels`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 12, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose genuinely non-obvious behavior: OR semantics within a list, AND semantics across fields, and the constraint that subject/object IDs must refer to the same relationship. It says nothing about pagination (limit/cursor), default page size, or what a result set looks like, so the behavioral picture is only half drawn.

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?

A single dense sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource and structured by a semicolon separating the two rules. Nothing is wasted, though the terseness borders on under-specification given the tool's complexity.

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?

The output schema is present, so return values need not be described, but a 20-parameter search tool with no annotations and no parameter documentation demands far more than one sentence. An agent still cannot tell how query interacts with filters or how to page results.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Twenty parameters with 0% schema description coverage, and the description only explains the list-combination logic and the subject/object pairing. It gives no meaning for query vs. the structured filters, no format hints for dois/paper_ids/author_ids, and no indication of which filters combine or conflict — most of the surface is undocumented in both places.

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 and resource ("Search papers") and immediately qualifies it with the matching logic. The resource noun alone distinguishes it from search_authors, search_concepts, and find_relationships, but the description never explicitly contrasts its role with those siblings.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of alternatives such as find_relationships or list_available_filters. An agent must infer from the sibling names alone whether a structured filter search or a relationship lookup is appropriate.

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

All Psychedelics Knowledge Graph 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.