Skip to main content
Glama

Crystallography

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Get Structure

get_structure
Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up a single crystal structure in the Crystallography Open Database (COD) by its numeric COD ID (e.g. "1009000"). Returns the compound/mineral name, chemical formula, space group, full unit-cell parameters (a, b, c, alpha, beta, gamma, volume), bibliographic details (title, authors, journal, year, DOI), and a link to the CIF structure file. Keyless.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
cod_idYesCOD numeric structure id, e.g. "1009000".

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool is 'Keyless' (no authentication needed) and specifies the database source and returned fields, providing useful context beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first defines the action and how, second lists returns and keyless status. No fluff, every sentence adds value. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

Given the simple tool (1 param, rich annotations, no output schema), the description adequately covers what it does and returns. It could mention failure behavior (e.g., if ID not found), but the openWorldHint may imply that.

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% for the single parameter, and the description adds value by giving a real-world example ('1009000') and explaining the parameter is a numeric COD ID. This helps the agent understand the expected format beyond the schema.

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 looks up a single crystal structure in the COD by numeric ID, listing what data it returns. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_cif and search_structures by specifying a single structure lookup with a numeric ID.

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 a known structure by COD ID, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like get_cif for file downloads or search_structures for queries.

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

All Crystallography toolsInspect
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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

There are three overlapping ask_pipeworx variants (stable, beta, grounded) plus a dense cluster of six polymarket trading/arbitrage tools, making misselection likely. Several other tools also blur together around research aggregation and entity lookup (entity_profile, compare_entities, recent_changes, validate_claim).

Naming Consistency3/5

All tool names are lowercase and snake_case, but the pattern is inconsistent: some are verb_noun (get_structure, resolve_entity), some are noun phrases (recent_changes, polymarket_edges), and a few are bare verbs (remember, forget, recall). The ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded suffix pattern is readable but not mirrored across the rest of the set.

Tool Count2/5

34 tools is above the 25+ threshold for a server whose stated purpose is Crystallography, and only 3 of those tools actually serve that domain. The rest belong to Pipeworx data lookup, Polymarket betting, memory, research, subscriptions, and unrelated utilities, so the count feels excessive and the scope is unclear.

Completeness3/5

As a broad data-research toolset, there is decent lifecycle coverage: lookup, research, grounded verification, entity resolution, comparison, subscriptions, feedback, and memory all exist. However, for a server named Crystallography the domain surface is thin (search/get/get CIF only), and there is no general web-search fallback for topics not in the structured catalog.

Resources