Nih Reporter

Get Project

get_project

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch one NIH project application record by application ID (numeric, distinct from project number). Returns its complete abstract, public-health relevance, terms, PIs, organization, dates, and award amount. Use nih_grant_award_history for multi-year award history.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`appl_id`	Yes	NIH application ID (integer)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`pis`	Yes	List of principal investigator names
`terms`	Yes	Complete terms/keywords for project
`title`	Yes	Project title
`appl_id`	Yes	NIH application ID
`abstract`	Yes	Full project abstract text
`org_city`	Yes	Organization city
`org_state`	Yes	Organization state code
`contact_pi`	Yes	Contact principal investigator name
`fiscal_year`	Yes	Fiscal year of award
`org_country`	Yes	Organization country
`project_end`	Yes	Project end date
`project_num`	Yes	Project number
`award_amount`	Yes	Total award amount in dollars
`organization`	Yes	Organization/institution name
`reporter_url`	Yes	Direct link to project on NIH Reporter
`nih_institute`	Yes	NIH Institute/Center abbreviation or code
`project_start`	Yes	Project start date
`terms_preview`	Yes	Preferred terms/keywords preview
`core_project_num`	Yes	Core project number
`award_notice_date`	Yes	Award notice date
`nih_institute_name`	Yes	Full name of NIH Institute/Center
`public_health_relevance`	Yes	Public health relevance statement

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedMay 24, 2026

addedInput schema / examples

Added value: +[
+  {
+    "appl_id": 10812345
+  }
+]

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "abstract": {
+      "description": "Full project abstract text",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "appl_id": {
+      "description": "NIH application ID",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "award_amount": {
+      "description": "Total award amount in dollars",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "award_notice_date": {
+      "description": "Award notice date",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "contact_pi": {
+      "description": "Contact principal investigator name",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "core_project_num": {
+      "description": "Core project number",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "fiscal_year": {
+      "description": "Fiscal year of award",
+      "type": [
+        "number",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "nih_institute": {
+      "description": "NIH Institute/Center abbreviation or code",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "nih_institute_name": {
+      "description": "Full name of NIH Institute/Center",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "org_city": {
+      "description": "Organization city",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "org_country": {
+      "description": "Organization country",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "org_state": {
+      "description": "Organization state code",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "organization": {
+      "description": "Organization/institution name",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "pis": {
+      "description": "List of principal investigator names",
+      "items": {
+        "type": [
+          "string",
+          "null"
+        ]
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    },
+    "project_end": {
+      "description": "Project end date",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "project_num": {
+      "description": "Project number",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "project_start": {
+      "description": "Project start date",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "public_health_relevance": {
+      "description": "Public health relevance statement",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "reporter_url": {
+      "description": "Direct link to project on NIH Reporter",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "terms": {
+      "description": "Complete terms/keywords for project",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "terms_preview": {
+      "description": "Preferred terms/keywords preview",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "Project title",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "appl_id",
+    "project_num",
+    "core_project_num",
+    "title",
+    "fiscal_year",
+    "award_amount",
+    "award_notice_date",
+    "project_start",
+    "project_end",
+    "nih_institute",
+    "nih_institute_name",
+    "contact_pi",
+    "pis",
+    "organization",
+    "org_city",
+    "org_state",
+    "org_country",
+    "terms_preview",
+    "reporter_url",
+    "abstract",
+    "public_health_relevance",
+    "terms"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedMay 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds behavioral context by clarifying that the ID is numeric and distinct from project number, and enumerates the returned data fields (abstract, relevance, terms, PIs, organization, dates, award amount), which goes beyond minimal disclosure.

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 the key operation and identifier, followed by a useful pointer to an alternative. Every phrase earns its place; no fluff or 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?

For a single-record fetch with one parameter, an output schema present, and strong annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to instead use a sibling. No critical gaps.

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 covers appl_id with 'NIH application ID (integer)' at 100% coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds extra meaning by noting it is numeric and 'distinct from project number,' which prevents a common confusion. This raises it above baseline.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('NIH project application record') with a precise identifier ('application ID'), and lists returned content. It also distinguishes itself from sibling nih_grant_award_history by directing users there for multi-year history.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

Explicitly provides an alternative: 'Use nih_grant_award_history for multi-year award history.' This clearly tells the agent when not to use this tool and which sibling to choose instead.

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

All Nih Reporter tools Inspect

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.