Zovo Trial Finder

Find recruiting clinical trials

find_recruiting_trials

Read-onlyIdempotent

Use this when someone wants recruiting clinical trials for a condition, optionally near a city, as a shortlist to discuss with a doctor. Returns up to 10 studies from live ClinicalTrials.gov records, sorted by distance to the nearest open site and then by recruiting status, with eligibility at a glance, contacts and a PDF and CSV. Does not give medical advice, judge which trial is better, or check whether a person qualifies. Do not use for drug prices or treatment recommendations.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "condition": "<condition>"
    },
    "name": "find_recruiting_trials"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`age`	No	Age in whole years to filter by the study's age limits, e.g. 62. Optional.
`sex`	No	Filter to studies open to this sex, e.g. female. Optional.
`city`	No	City to measure distance from, e.g. Chicago. Cities with 15,000+ people are recognized; use the nearest larger city otherwise.
`state`	No	U.S. state name or two-letter code for the city, e.g. IL. Leave empty outside the United States.
`phases`	No	Only these phases, e.g. ["phase2","phase3"]. Optional.
`country`	No	Country name or two-letter code, e.g. United States or US.
`condition`	Yes	One condition or disease name, e.g. melanoma or type 2 diabetes. Not a sentence.
`distance_miles`	No	Search radius around the city in miles, 5 to 500, default 50, e.g. 100.
`include_not_yet_recruiting`	No	Also list studies that are not yet recruiting, e.g. true. Default false.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`notes`	Yes
`query`	Yes
`shown`	Yes
`source`	Yes
`trials`	Yes
`checked`	Yes
`ranking`	Yes
`downloads`	Yes
`disclaimer`	Yes
`after_filters`	Yes
`total_matching`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 8, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds substantial context beyond that: a cap of 10 results, live ClinicalTrials.gov as the source, sort order (distance to nearest open site, then recruiting status), and included artifacts (eligibility, contacts, PDF/CSV).

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the usage trigger, then the return shape, then the exclusions. No sentence is redundant and the ordering matches how an agent would reason about invoking the tool.

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 nine-parameter, open-world search tool with an output schema, the description covers trigger, scope, result count, ordering, and explicit non-goals. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so the schema already documents all nine parameters with examples and defaults. The description only echoes the optional city filter and adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('find recruiting clinical trials for a condition, optionally near a city') and frames the output as a shortlist of up to 10 studies. An agent can immediately tell this is a search/list tool rather than a detail lookup, distinguishing it from get_trial_details even without naming the sibling.

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?

It gives an explicit trigger ('Use this when someone wants...') and explicit exclusions ('Do not use for drug prices or treatment recommendations'), plus scope limits (no medical advice, no qualification checks). The only gap is that it never names get_trial_details as the follow-up alternative for a specific study.

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

All Zovo Trial Finder 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.

Resources

Need Help?