Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

Guidetopharmacology

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Search Ligands

search_ligands
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Guide to PHARMACOLOGY (IUPHAR/BPS) — an expert-curated pharmacology database — for drug ligands by name. Returns matching ligands with their GtoPdb ligand id, type (e.g. Synthetic organic, Peptide, Antibody, Metabolite), and approval status. Use the returned ligand id with ligand_interactions to find which protein targets it acts on. Requires a GtoPdb API key — register free at guidetopharmacology.org/login.jsp and pass your own via _apiKey. Complements ChEMBL/DrugBank.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesLigand name or fragment to search for, e.g. "aspirin" or "imatinib".
limitNoMax results to return (default 15).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / examples
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "name": "aspirin"
-  },
-  {
-    "limit": 10,
-    "name": "imatinib"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-guidetopharmacology-api-key",
+    "name": "aspirin"
+  },
+  {
+    "_apiKey": "your-guidetopharmacology-api-key",
+    "limit": 10,
+    "name": "imatinib"
+  }
+]
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "name": "aspirin"
+  },
+  {
+    "limit": 10,
+    "name": "imatinib"
+  }
+]
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely new context beyond them: an external API key is required and must be registered and passed via _apiKey. It omits rate limits or pagination behavior, keeping it at a solid 4.

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, front-loaded with the core action and database identity, then return shape, then routing, then the auth prerequisite. No filler or restated boilerplate.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully enumerates the returned fields (ligand id, type, approval status), covers the auth requirement, and points to the follow-up tool. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly and interpret the result.

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 both parameters are documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description restates 'by name' and its examples (aspirin, imatinib) mirror the schema examples rather than adding new syntax or matching semantics.

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 (search) and resource (drug ligands by name in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY), and enumerates what is returned (GtoPdb ligand id, type, approval status). It is clearly distinguishable from siblings search_targets and ligand_interactions, which operate on targets/interactions rather than ligand lookup.

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?

Gives clear downstream routing: use the returned ligand id with ligand_interactions to find protein targets. Also positions the tool against external sources ('Complements ChEMBL/DrugBank'). It does not state when NOT to use this tool or which sibling to prefer for a name-vs-target query, so it stops short of full when/when-not guidance.

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

All Guidetopharmacology 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