Skip to main content
Glama

Find GenCC Curations

find_curations
Read-onlyIdempotent

Filter aggregated gene-disease assertions by classification, submitter, mode of inheritance, gene, disease, or conflict status. Supports paging and returns matched submissions with detailed or compact identifiers.

Instructions

Filter aggregated gene-disease assertions by classification(s), submitter(s), mode of inheritance, gene (gene_symbol or hgnc_id), disease, or conflict status, with limit/offset paging. Example: classification=['Definitive'], moi='Autosomal dominant', submitter=['ClinGen']. At least one filter is required. classification/submitter/moi match at the submission level (any submitter), not the consensus -- each row's matched field names the triggering submission. Filter values are validated (case-insensitive); out-of-vocabulary values return invalid_input with the accepted set (see get_server_capabilities / list_submitters). Pass ids_only=true to return only {gene_curie, disease_curie} pairs for cheap paging, then fetch detail for the pairs you want. Large sweeps: follow truncated.next_cursor (an opaque, release-bound page token) via _meta.next_commands to page the full set; a cursor minted under a prior data release is rejected so a weekly refresh can't silently skip or duplicate rows.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
moiNo
limitNo
cursorNo
offsetNo
diseaseNo
hgnc_idNo
ids_onlyNo
submitterNo
gene_symbolNo
has_conflictNo
response_modeNoVerbosity: minimal | compact | standard | full.compact
classificationNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
_metaNoPer-call envelope metadata.
countNo
totalNo
filtersNo
messageNo
resultsNo
successYes
headlineNo
retryableNo
truncatedNo
error_codeNo
field_errorsNo
recovery_actionNo
Behavior5/5

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

Adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: required filters, submission-level matching, validation with error handling, ids_only optimization, cursor semantics (opaque, release-bound, rejected on stale data). No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Concise but thorough; front-loaded with purpose, followed by example, behavioral details, and edge cases. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Given 12 parameters, paging, and complex submission-level logic, the description covers validation, paging via cursor, ids_only for efficiency, and response structure. Output schema exists, so return values need no further explanation. Highly complete.

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 low (8%), and the description compensates for key parameters like classification, submitter, moi, ids_only, and cursor. However, parameters like disease, hgnc_id, gene_symbol, and has_conflict lack elaboration, relying on schema descriptions that are minimal.

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 clearly states the tool filters aggregated gene-disease assertions by multiple criteria. It specifies the resource and action, and distinguishes from siblings like get_gene_curations and get_disease_curations by focusing on cross-entity filtering.

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?

The description explains required filters, example usage, validation behavior, and paging strategies. It lacks explicit when-to-use vs. sibling tools, but provides sufficient context for proper invocation.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/berntpopp/gencc-link'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server