protein-tools-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

run_details

Fetch a complete registry record for one protein entry by numeric ID or run_id, so you can inspect all stored details and outputs.

Instructions

Full record for one registry entry, by numeric id or run_id.

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": {
      "rid": "<rid>"
    },
    "name": "run_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`rid`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Oct 20, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only fetch but says nothing about what happens with an unknown id, whether the lookup is case-sensitive, or any access constraints.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource front-loaded and the identifier semantics tacked on efficiently. No wasted words.

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?

An output schema exists, so return contents need not be described. For a one-parameter read tool this is close to sufficient, but the failure mode for a bad rid and the relationship to list_runs remain unstated.

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 coverage is 0% — the rid property has no description at all. The description partially compensates by explaining that rid accepts 'numeric id or run_id', which is genuine added meaning, but it doesn't clarify the expected format or precedence.

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+resource: retrieve the 'full record for one registry entry'. That contrasts implicitly with the sibling list_runs, though it never names the sibling to make the differentiation explicit.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus list_runs or any other sibling, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer that 'full record' means single-item lookup.

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