Skip to main content
Glama

Pubmed

by io.github.pipeworx-io
OverviewAdmin

Get Abstract

get_abstract
Read-onlyIdempotent

Full abstract text for one PubMed article by ID. Returns the abstract with structured sections (background, methods, results, conclusions) when the journal published it that way, otherwise the unstructured abstract. Use when summarizing a single paper or answering "what does paper X actually say". For batch citation metadata use get_summary; for finding papers use search_pubmed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoA single PubMed ID (e.g., "33579999"). `pmid` is accepted as a synonym.
pmidNoSynonym for `id` — the other PMID-taking tools in this pack spell it this way.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlYesPubMed article URL
pmidYesPubMed ID
titleYesArticle title
abstractYesFull abstract text with structured sections

Schema Changelog

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

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / id / description
      Previous value: -"A single PubMed ID (e.g., \"33579999\")"New value: +"A single PubMed ID (e.g., \"33579999\"). `pmid` is accepted as a synonym."
    • addedInput schema / properties / pmid
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Synonym for `id` — the other PMID-taking tools in this pack spell it this way.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • removedInput schema / required
      Removed value: -[
-  "id"
-]
  2. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "id": "33579999"
+  }
+]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "abstract": {
+      "description": "Full abstract text with structured sections",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "pmid": {
+      "description": "PubMed ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "Article title",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "PubMed article URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "pmid",
+    "title",
+    "abstract",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  3. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • removedInput schema / examples
      Removed value: -[
-  {
-    "id": "33579999"
-  }
-]
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "abstract": {
-      "description": "Full abstract text with structured sections",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "pmid": {
-      "description": "PubMed ID",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "title": {
-      "description": "Article title",
-      "type": [
-        "string",
-        "null"
-      ]
-    },
-    "url": {
-      "description": "PubMed article URL",
-      "type": "string"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "pmid",
-    "title",
-    "abstract",
-    "url"
-  ],
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  4. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "abstract": {
+      "description": "Full abstract text with structured sections",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "pmid": {
+      "description": "PubMed ID",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "title": {
+      "description": "Article title",
+      "type": [
+        "string",
+        "null"
+      ]
+    },
+    "url": {
+      "description": "PubMed article URL",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "pmid",
+    "title",
+    "abstract",
+    "url"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}
  5. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "id": "33579999"
+  }
+]
  6. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by explaining that the abstract may be returned with structured sections (background, methods, results, conclusions) or unstructured, depending on the journal. This goes beyond what annotations provide, though it does not mention rate limits or authentication.

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?

The description is concise and well-structured: it starts with the core function, then explains the structured/unstructured behavior, then gives usage guidance and alternatives. Every sentence serves a purpose and there is no fluff.

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 that the tool has a simple input schema (two synonym parameters), rich annotations, and an output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, the variability of the return format, and when to use it relative to siblings. It is complete for this tool's complexity.

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 input schema covers both parameters (id and pmid) with descriptions and notes that pmid is a synonym for id. The description adds only that it is 'by ID', which is already implied by the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description does not add deeper semantic meaning 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 returns the full abstract text for one PubMed article by ID. It also explicitly distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming get_summary for batch citation metadata and search_pubmed for finding papers, so the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

The description provides explicit usage guidance: 'Use when summarizing a single paper or answering what does paper X actually say'. It also explicitly states alternatives: 'For batch citation metadata use get_summary; for finding papers use search_pubmed', giving clear when-to-use vs. when-not-to-use guidance.

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

All Pubmed 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.

Resources