Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
MolTalk

MolTalk

by DomFico
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

Resolve Molecule Name

resolve_name
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a compound name to a chemical structure using offline libraries, IUPAC parsing, or optional PubChem lookup, and flag ambiguous or unverified stereochemistry.

Instructions

Resolve a compound name to a structure. Tried in order: (1) MolTalk's bundled library of thousands of common compounds (trivial names, synonyms, IUPAC names; offline); (2) OPSIN, which reads systematic IUPAC names offline, including stereodescriptors; (3) PubChem, only when allow_network=true (best effort; the name is sent to PubChem). A name shared by different structures is reported as ambiguous, not guessed. A name that states stereochemistry (R/S, E/Z, axial) must resolve to a structure that encodes it, or it is rejected as unverified. The result reports the structure's source, identity and stereo_summary.

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": {
      "name": "<name>"
    },
    "name": "resolve_name"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYes
allow_networkNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint. Beyond those, the description adds real value: offline vs network behavior, the privacy note that the name is sent to PubChem, ambiguity handling (reported, not guessed), and the strict rejection of unverified stereochemistry. The one omission is that it doesn't state whether results are cached or how failures look, which keeps it below the top score.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then a numbered resolution chain that is easy to scan, followed by policy rules. Dense but every clause carries information; only the final sentence about result fields partially duplicates the output schema.

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 an output schema present, return values needn't be detailed, yet the description still names source, identity and stereo_summary. Combined with annotations and the ordered fallback chain, an agent has everything needed to call this correctly and to interpret ambiguous or unverified outcomes.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the burden. It explains that allow_network=true is the switch that unlocks the PubChem lookup and that the name value is sent there, and it implicitly documents accepted name forms (trivial names, synonyms, IUPAC). It never states what an invalid or malformed name does, which is the remaining gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: "Resolve a compound name to a structure." It follows immediately with the resolution chain, so the tool's scope is unmistakable; the only gap is that it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings such as draw_named_molecule, which likely also consumes a name.

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 conditional guidance: the three resolvers are tried in a stated order, and PubChem is reached only when allow_network=true. It does not say when to prefer another tool instead, but the fallback conditions remove most ambiguity about how to invoke it.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools