BioCosm

get_node

Get full details for a single BioCosm node: identity and all name aliases, classification, gene targets and mechanism, therapeutic areas, companies, revenue history where available (sparse: ~100 drugs, mostly blockbusters, as annualized quarterly estimates; source links when present), probability-of- success predictions for pipeline drugs (with confidence intervals and contributing factors), structured clinical trial outcomes, external cross-references, and writeup availability. Empty fields mean "not in BioCosm's coverage," NOT zero or absent in reality.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`node_id`	Yes	The node identifier (e.g. "pembrolizumab", "trastuzumab")

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

First observedJun 18, 2026

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It details all returned fields, notes sparsity of revenue data, explains that empty fields mean not in coverage rather than zero, and mentions source links and writeup availability. No destructive side effects implied.

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 description is well-structured with a clear overview followed by a detailed list and a usage note. While slightly long, every sentence adds value and there is no redundancy.

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?

Given the simple input (one parameter) and presence of an output schema, the description is complete. It explains what the tool returns in detail, leaving no obvious gaps for an agent to understand its functionality.

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?

The only parameter (node_id) is fully described in the schema with 100% coverage. The description adds context that the node is a 'single BioCosm node' but no extra syntax or semantics beyond the schema, warranting baseline 3.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves full details for a single BioCosm node, listing specific data fields like aliases, classifications, revenue history, etc. It distinguishes from sibling tools by being comprehensive and node-specific.

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?

The description implies usage for retrieving all details of a specific node, but does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives like search_nodes or get_pos_score. The note about empty fields provides some guidance but lacks explicit when-to/not-to-use instructions.

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

All BioCosm tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation4/5

Tools have mostly distinct purposes, though get_node and get_pos_score both provide probability-of-success data (get_node includes a summary, get_pos_score gives detailed factors). Descriptions clarify the difference, so confusion is minimal.

Naming Consistency4/5

Naming follows a verb_noun pattern but mixes verbs: 'find', 'get', 'list', 'search'. Within the 'get' group, all are consistent. The mix is not chaotic and remains predictable.

Tool Count5/5

13 tools cover the biomedical domain well without being excessive. Each tool has a clear purpose, from searching and listing to fetching detailed node data, statistics, and specialized reports.

Completeness5/5

For a read-only database, the tool set is complete. It supports search, filtered queries, detailed node retrieval, specialized data (PoS, freshness, staleness), and statistics. No obvious gaps for typical query needs.

Resources

Need Help?