Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cxg-census-mcp

cxg-census-mcp

by MaxMLang
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

term_definition

Retrieve the label, definition, synonyms, and IRI for a given CURIE identifier from the CZ CELLxGENE Census ontology.

Instructions

Return label, definition, synonyms, IRI for a CURIE.

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": {
      "curie": "<curie>"
    },
    "name": "term_definition"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
curieYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A3.7/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It states what is returned but omits details like error handling (e.g., invalid CURIE), output format, or any side effects. Adequate for a simple lookup but could be more transparent.

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?

One concise sentence (6 words) conveying the tool's purpose with no redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Absence of output schema and annotations leaves gaps. The description does not cover return structure or edge cases, but the tool's simplicity partly compensates.

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?

Single parameter 'curie' is described as 'a CURIE' but lacks format examples or constraints. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal 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?

Description explicitly states the tool returns label, definition, synonyms, and IRI for a CURIE. It clearly identifies the resource and action, distinguishing from similar tools like 'resolve_term' or 'expand_term'.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'resolve_term' or 'expand_term'. The context is implied but not clarified.

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