Skip to main content
Glama

fetch_entry

Retrieve a structured UniProt entry by accession number, with optional fields and version.

Instructions

Return a structured UniProt entry.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accessionYes
fieldsNo
versionNo

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
accessionYesPrimary accession identifier.
idNoUniProt entry name/ID.
reviewedYesTrue for Swiss-Prot, False for TrEMBL.
protein_nameNoRecommended protein name where available.
gene_symbolsNoCanonical gene symbols associated with the entry.
organismNoScientific name of the source organism.
taxonomy_idNoNCBI taxonomy identifier for the organism.
sequenceNoProtein sequence metadata when available.
featuresNoAnnotated sequence features.
goNoGene Ontology annotations extracted from the entry.
xrefsNoCross-references to external databases.
raw_payloadNoOriginal UniProt payload for debugging or future enrichment.
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations, the description is the sole source of behavioral info. It only says 'structured' without explaining behavior like auth, errors, or idempotency. Output schema exists but is not described.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one sentence, concise, but so minimal that it sacrifices informativeness. It could be expanded while staying concise.

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

Completeness1/5

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

Given 3 parameters, no annotations, and existing output schema, the description fails to provide sufficient context for correct usage. It omits parameter roles, output format, and use cases.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds no explanation for parameters (accession, fields, version) beyond their names, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 clearly states the action (return) and resource (structured UniProt entry). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like fetch_entry_flatfile, so it could be more specific.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools exist but are not mentioned, and no usage context is provided.

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/fastmcp-me/uniprot-mcp'

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