Skip to main content
Glama

MeSH Allowable Qualifiers

mesh_qualifiers
Read-onlyIdempotent

Get allowed qualifiers (subheadings) for a MeSH descriptor.

Use this tool to:

  • Find which qualifiers can be combined with a descriptor

  • Build precise MeSH search queries

  • Understand aspects that can be specified

Qualifiers refine descriptors (e.g., "Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy").

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mesh_idYesMeSH Descriptor ID (e.g., D015242, D003920)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
mesh_idYes
provenanceYesProvenance block (contract v1.1): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, origin diagnostics, citation, license
qualifiersYes
attributionYesCanonical source URLs of this response (attribution list)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / description
      Previous value: -"Provenance block (contract v1.0): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, citation, license"New value: +"Provenance block (contract v1.1): source, URL, data vintage, extraction instant, origin diagnostics, citation, license"
    • addedOutput schema / properties / provenance / properties / retrieval
      Added value: +{
      +  "anyOf": [
      +    {
      +      "additionalProperties": false,
      +      "properties": {
      +        "anomalies": {
      +          "description": "Anomalias superadas até o sucesso, somadas por classe, em ordem fixa; [] se nenhuma",
      +          "items": {
      +            "additionalProperties": false,
      +            "properties": {
      +              "count": {
      +                "description": "Ocorrências desta classe na chamada",
      +                "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +                "minimum": 1,
      +                "type": "integer"
      +              },
      +              "kind": {
      +                "description": "Classe da anomalia (vocabulário fechado do contrato)",
      +                "enum": [
      +                  "timeout",
      +                  "network",
      +                  "http_4xx",
      +                  "http_5xx",
      +                  "rate_limited",
      +                  "malformed_body"
      +                ],
      +                "type": "string"
      +              }
      +            },
      +            "required": [
      +              "kind",
      +              "count"
      +            ],
      +            "type": "object"
      +          },
      +          "type": "array"
      +        },
      +        "attempts": {
      +          "description": "Tentativas somadas, incluindo as repetidas (>= requests)",
      +          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +          "minimum": 1,
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "requests": {
      +          "description": "Idas distintas à origem que compõem esta resposta (fatias, páginas)",
      +          "maximum": 9007199254740991,
      +          "minimum": 1,
      +          "type": "integer"
      +        },
      +        "unstable": {
      +          "description": "true se houve repetição (attempts > requests) ou alguma anomalia",
      +          "type": "boolean"
      +        }
      +      },
      +      "required": [
      +        "requests",
      +        "attempts",
      +        "anomalies",
      +        "unstable"
      +      ],
      +      "type": "object"
      +    },
      +    {
      +      "type": "null"
      +    }
      +  ],
      +  "description": "Origin diagnostics of THIS source in this call (contract v1.1): requests made to the upstream, attempts summed across retries, anomalies worked around (kind + count); unstable=true when any anomaly happened. null when nothing was measured (bundled dataset, or response served entirely from cache)"
      +}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / provenance / required
      Previous value: -[
      -  "source",
      -  "source_url",
      -  "data_vintage",
      -  "retrieved_at",
      -  "citation",
      -  "license"
      -]New value: +[
      +  "source",
      +  "source_url",
      +  "data_vintage",
      +  "retrieved_at",
      +  "retrieval",
      +  "citation",
      +  "license"
      +]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
  3. First observed

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the domain nuance that qualifiers refine descriptors, plus the 'Descriptor/qualifier' notation example; it says nothing about behavior on an invalid or non-existent mesh_id. With annotations carrying the behavioral burden, 3 is appropriate.

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?

Well front-loaded: the core purpose is the first sentence, followed by scannable bullets and a concrete example. It is slightly redundant, since 'Find which qualifiers can be combined with a descriptor' restates the opening sentence, which keeps it off a 5.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a single-parameter read-only lookup, the description covers purpose, use cases, and the notation semantics; nothing essential is missing, though an explicit pointer to mesh_descriptor for the descriptor itself would complete the routing story.

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% and the single mesh_id parameter is fully documented in the schema with a pattern and examples. The description adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

The opening sentence states a specific verb and resource: 'Get allowed qualifiers (subheadings) for a MeSH descriptor.' That is unambiguous and distinguishes it from the descriptor/lookup siblings. It stops short of naming an alternative (e.g., mesh_descriptor) to route the agent, so it lands at 4 rather than 5.

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 'Use this tool to:' bullets give concrete contexts (combining qualifiers with a descriptor, building precise queries, enumerating specifiable aspects), which is clear when-to-use guidance. There are no exclusions or named alternatives for cases like 'I just want the descriptor itself', so it is not a full 5.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.