Agent Tools

clinical_trials_search

Search ClinicalTrials.gov for health-research agents: keyword, condition or intervention in; trials out with NCT ID, title, status, phases, study type, enrollment, conditions, interventions, lead sponsor, start and completion dates, results flag, site count and link. Filter by status (e.g. RECRUITING), phase and location. Registry data only, not medical advice. Price $0.005 USDC per call via x402. Example output: {"total_matches":822,"returned":1,"studies":[{"nct_id":"NCT06467604","title":"CRAVE Study: Comparing Craving Responses and Diet Quality of GLP1 Receptor Agonist Users","status":"ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING","phases":["NA"],"study_type":"OBSERVATIONAL","enrollment":60,"conditions":["Obesity"],"intervention

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": "clinical_trials_search"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`q`	No	Optional free-text term
`limit`	No	1 to 25, default 10
`phase`	No	Optional phase or comma list, e.g. PHASE2,PHASE3
`status`	No	Optional status or comma list, e.g. RECRUITING
`location`	No	Optional city, state or country
`condition`	No	Optional condition or disease
`intervention`	No	Optional drug, device or procedure

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the registry-only nature, the 'not medical advice' caveat, the x402 price, and the shape of returned trial records. It does not mention rate limits, error behavior, or authentication details beyond the payment hint.

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?

The important information is front-loaded: purpose, inputs, outputs, filters, caveat, and price. The example output is lengthy and truncated, but it usefully illustrates the return shape; the rest of the description is dense and mostly earns its place.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description compensates by listing the returned fields and providing an example response. All optional parameters are covered by the schema, and the pricing, data-source caveat, and filtering story give an agent enough context to call the tool correctly.

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%, so all seven parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces the main filters and gives examples such as RECRUITING and PHASE2,PHASE3, but it does not add syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search ClinicalTrials.gov' for trials. It names the key input dimensions and the exact trial fields returned, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinguishable from generic web or paper search siblings.

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?

It clearly says this is for health-research agents and supports filtering by status, phase, and location. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as papers_search or federal_register_search, but the ClinicalTrials.gov scope makes the intended use clear.

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

All Agent 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.

Resources

Need Help?