Skip to main content
Glama

Get HPO Term

get_term
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve a complete HPO term record including definition, synonyms, cross-references, and hierarchical relationships by providing an HP ID, label, or external reference.

Instructions

Return an HPO phenotype term record: definition, synonyms (exact/related/broad/narrow), alt_ids, subsets, comments, cross-references, direct parents and children, and obsolescence (replaced_by). The term accepts an HP id, a label/synonym, or an external xref CURIE (resolved first). Pass fields=['synonyms', 'definition'] for a sparse projection. Note on synonyms shape: compact (default) returns synonyms as plain strings; standard/full return {text, scope} objects. Signature: get_term(hpo_id, response_mode=, fields=).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
fieldsNoSparse fieldset: return ONLY these top-level keys (dot into a grouped object, e.g. 'xrefs.UMLS'). Identity anchors (hpo_id, name, hpo_version) are always included. Omit for the full payload.
hpo_idYesCanonical HP id for the resolved HPO term (HP:0000118). Legacy `term` arguments are accepted as an alias.
response_modeNoVerbosity: minimal|compact|standard|full (default compact).compact

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
hintNo
nameNo
_metaNo
fieldNo
hpo_idNo
alt_idsNo
messageNo
parentsNo
subsetsNo
successNo
childrenNo
commentsNo
obsoleteNo
synonymsNo
retryableNo
candidatesNo
definitionNo
error_codeNo
hpo_versionNo
allowed_valuesNo
recovery_actionNo
recommended_citationNo
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral details: input resolution (HP id, label, xref), obsolescence handling, and synonym shape options, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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 thorough but efficient, front-loading the main purpose and then detailing options. Every sentence adds value, though it could be slightly more streamlined.

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 the tool has an output schema and high schema coverage, the description provides all necessary context: input variations, sparse projection, synonym shape modes, and obsolescence information. It is fully sufficient for an AI agent to understand and invoke the tool.

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 100%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds further meaning by explaining the input types accepted (HP id, label, xref), the signature, and the effect of the 'fields' parameter, which goes beyond the schema descriptions.

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 uses specific verbs ('Return') and resources ('HPO phenotype term record'), and lists the returned fields, clearly distinguishing this general term retrieval from sibling tools like get_term_ancestors or get_term_children.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does, including input types and output options. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when to avoid it, though the specialization of siblings is implied.

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/hpo-link'

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