interpro-mcp-server

Read an InterProScan job

interpro_get_scan_result

Read-onlyIdempotent

Check an InterProScan job started by interpro_scan_sequence, waiting up to waitSeconds for it to finish. Returns the matches once finished, otherwise its queued or running status to check again later. Matches are InterProScan records verbatim, 1-based and inclusive, with the InterPro and InterProScan versions that produced them. Jobs and their results expire seven days after submission.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "jobId": "<jobId>"
    },
    "name": "interpro_get_scan_result"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`jobId`	Yes	jobId returned by interpro_scan_sequence, such as iprscan6-R20261028-131532-0930-13189043-p1m.
`cursor`	No	Opaque coverage.nextCursor from an earlier result for this same jobId, to read the next segment.
`waitSeconds`	No	Seconds to wait for a pending job to finish; 0 checks its status once and returns.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`md5`	No	Uppercase hex MD5 of the uppercased residues, the UniParc sequence digest.
`error`	No	Present when the call failed. Absent on success.
`jobId`	No	InterProScan job ID on the interproscan path; results stay retrievable for seven days.
`shown`	No	Match records in this segment.
`length`	No	Sequence length in residues.
`notice`	No	Job, continuation, or empty-result guidance.
`source`	No	Which path produced the result: precalculated matches from the InterPro Matches API, or an InterProScan 6 job run through the EBI Job Dispatcher.
`status`	No	finished: matches are present. queued or running: the job is pending; read it later with interpro_get_scan_result. submitted: accepted in this call and not yet polled.
`matches`	No	Whole match records in this segment when finished, sorted by earliest location start then signature accession; coordinates are 1-based and inclusive. Each record keeps its own source and signatureLibraryRelease.
`coverage`	No	Where this segment sits in the complete match list; present when finished.
`sourceUrl`	No	Upstream endpoint that supplied this result.
`truncated`	No	More segments remain.
`totalCount`	No	Match records in the complete result.
`interproVersion`	No	InterPro release of a finished InterProScan job.
`interproscanVersion`	No	InterProScan version of a finished job.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover read-only/idempotent/open-world, and the description goes well beyond them: blocking wait semantics bounded by waitSeconds, the two possible return shapes, verbatim/1-based inclusive record semantics, version provenance, and the seven-day expiry of jobs and results.

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?

Four tight sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose+origin, return shapes, result semantics, and retention limit. Nothing is redundant and the core purpose is front-loaded.

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 polling tool with an output schema, annotations, and fully described params, the description supplies everything still needed: how long it blocks, what it returns when unfinished, and when results disappear.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already documents waitSeconds including the 0 = single-status-check behavior, so the description adds essentially nothing new about parameters; the opaque cursor is not mentioned at all. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Check an InterProScan job') and immediately ties it to the sibling that creates the job (interpro_scan_sequence), distinguishing it from the other InterPro lookup tools. The second sentence clarifies the dual outcome (matches vs. status).

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?

Clearly frames usage: it is the follow-up to interpro_scan_sequence, and 'check again later' tells the agent how to poll. It stops short of explicitly saying there is no alternative way to retrieve results, but the context is unambiguous.

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

All interpro-mcp-server 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.