Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
kegg-mcp-server

kegg-mcp-server

by Lucas-Servi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

get_module_info

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve detailed KEGG module information by module ID, choosing summary or full flat-file detail for pathway and functional analysis.

Instructions

Get detailed information for a KEGG module.

Args: module_id: KEGG module ID (e.g. 'M00001' for glycolysis core module). detail_level: 'summary' (default, compact) or 'full' (complete flat-file parse).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
module_idYes
detail_levelNosummary

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changedv0.5.0
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / EntrySummary / properties / symbol
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Symbol"
+}
    • removedOutput schema / $defs / ErrorResult
      Removed value: -{
-  "description": "Structured error returned by a tool when the KEGG API fails.\n\nA tool returns this instead of raising so the model can reason about\nthe failure and decide whether to retry, change inputs, or give up.\nA point lookup that receives a 404 uses code ``not_found``; an empty search\nremains a successful result with no items.",
-  "properties": {
-    "code": {
-      "default": "kegg_api_error",
-      "title": "Code",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "error": {
-      "title": "Error",
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "hint": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "null"
-        }
-      ],
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Hint"
-    },
-    "path": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "type": "string"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "null"
-        }
-      ],
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Path"
-    },
-    "retryable": {
-      "default": false,
-      "title": "Retryable",
-      "type": "boolean"
-    },
-    "status": {
-      "anyOf": [
-        {
-          "type": "integer"
-        },
-        {
-          "type": "null"
-        }
-      ],
-      "default": null,
-      "title": "Status"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "error"
-  ],
-  "title": "ErrorResult",
-  "type": "object"
-}
    • addedOutput schema / $defs / Reference / properties / sequence
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Sequence"
+}
    • changedOutput schema / properties / result / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {
-    "$ref": "#/$defs/ModuleInfo"
-  },
-  {
-    "$ref": "#/$defs/EntrySummary"
-  },
-  {
-    "$ref": "#/$defs/ErrorResult"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/ModuleInfo"
+  },
+  {
+    "$ref": "#/$defs/EntrySummary"
+  }
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile: read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, and open-world. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that `detail_level` controls a compact summary versus a complete flat-file parse, but it does not add much beyond that.

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?

The description is short and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by compact argument notes. The Args block is efficient, though slightly redundant in style for an MCP definition.

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?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with an output schema and rich annotations, the description provides enough to call it correctly. The main missing element is explicit routing to `search_modules` as an alternative for discovering module IDs.

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 must carry parameter meaning, and it does: `module_id` is explained with an example, and `detail_level` is described with its default and the meaning of `summary` versus `full`.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource: retrieving detailed information for a KEGG module. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling `search_modules`, which could also involve modules, so sibling differentiation is left implicit.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description supplies argument semantics but gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as `search_modules` to find a module ID first. Usage is only inferable from the required `module_id` parameter.

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