Skip to main content
Glama

Mychem

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Chem

chem
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch the full aggregated annotation for a single chemical / drug by id. The id is typically an InChIKey (e.g. "BSYNRYMUTXBXSQ-UHFFFAOYSA-N"), but a DrugBank id, ChEMBL id, or other source id also works. Returns merged annotations from ChEMBL, DrugBank, PubChem, ChEBI, DrugCentral, etc., including mechanism, indication, and pharmacology cross-references.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idYesAn InChIKey like "BSYNRYMUTXBXSQ-UHFFFAOYSA-N", or a DrugBank / ChEMBL id.
fieldsNoComma-separated return fields (default: all).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "id": "BSYNRYMUTXBXSQ-UHFFFAOYSA-N"
+  },
+  {
+    "id": "DB00945"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover safety and read-only nature. Description adds value by disclosing returned data sources (ChEMBL, DrugBank, etc.) and content types (mechanism, indication, pharmacology). No contradictions.

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, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Every sentence provides essential information.

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?

Description explains return content well, including sources and data types. For a simple tool with no output schema, this suffices. Could be improved by mentioning response structure or limits.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). Description adds examples of valid ids (InChIKey, DrugBank, ChEMBL) but largely restates schema info. Minimal additional semantic value.

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?

Description clearly states the tool fetches full aggregated annotations for a single chemical/drug by id, specifying accepted id types and data sources. Distinguished from siblings like entity_profile by focus on chemical annotations.

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?

Implies usage when you have a chemical/drug id and want aggregated annotations, but does not explicitly mention when not to use or compare to sibling tools. No guidance on alternatives.

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

All Mychem 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