Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

interpro-mcp-server

by io.github.cyanheads
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

InterPro reference vocabulary

interpro_list_reference
Read-onlyIdempotent

List supported InterPro database slugs, entry types, accession and PDB identifier patterns, common taxon IDs, or current release information.

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": {
      "topic": "<topic>"
    },
    "name": "interpro_list_reference"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
topicYesReference topic; release retrieves current upstream metadata.

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
errorNoPresent when the call failed. Absent on success.
itemsNoApplicable reference vocabulary; empty for release.
topicNoReference topic; release retrieves current upstream metadata.
releaseNoCurrent live release metadata when requested.
sourceUrlsNoOfficial reference sources.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / items / items / properties / accessionPattern / description
      Previous value: -"Case-insensitive accession routing pattern."New value: +"Accession routing pattern, case-insensitive except where the item description says otherwise."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only mild context (that the payload is a static reference vocabulary), and the one live-data caveat ('release retrieves current upstream metadata') lives in the schema rather than the description, so behavioral disclosure is adequate but thin.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that opens with the verb and then lists the topic space in a parallel structure mirroring the enum. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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?

With one enum parameter, full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description only needs to convey scope and topic mapping, which it does. The minor gap is the absence of explicit guidance on ordering this call relative to the sibling lookup tools that consume the returned slugs and IDs.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with a single enum parameter, so the baseline is 3. The description earns an extra point by expanding the terse enum labels into meaning — 'accession_patterns' covers both accession and PDB identifier patterns, 'taxa' means common taxon IDs, and 'release' means current release information — which is genuinely beyond the enum strings.

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 ('List') and a specific resource (supported InterPro reference vocabulary), then enumerates exactly what kinds of reference data come back: slugs, entry types, accession/PDB patterns, taxon IDs, release info. It is clearly distinct from the sibling lookup/search tools, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent can infer this is the tool to reach for when it needs a valid database slug, taxon ID, or accession format before calling interpro_search_entries or interpro_get_entry. There is no explicit 'use this when...' or 'do not use for...' guidance, and no sibling is named as the alternative.

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 toolsInspect
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