Skip to main content
Glama

trial_searcher

Search ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical trials by conditions, interventions, location, phase, and eligibility. Filter results efficiently using geolocation, recruiting status, and study type. Returns detailed trial information for medical research.

Instructions

Search ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical studies.

⚠️ PREREQUISITE: Use the 'think' tool FIRST to plan your research strategy!

Comprehensive search tool for finding clinical trials based on multiple criteria.
Supports filtering by conditions, interventions, location, phase, and eligibility.

Location search notes:
- Use either location term OR lat/long coordinates, not both
- For city-based searches, AI agents should geocode to lat/long first
- Distance parameter only works with lat/long coordinates

Returns a formatted list of matching trials with key details.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
age_groupNoFilter by age group
conditionsNoMedical conditions to search for
distanceNoDistance in miles from lat/long coordinates
funder_typeNoFilter by funding source
healthy_volunteersNoFilter by healthy volunteer eligibility
interventionsNoTreatment interventions to search for
latNoLatitude for location-based search. AI agents should geocode city names before using.
locationNoLocation term for geographic filtering
longNoLongitude for location-based search. AI agents should geocode city names before using.
other_termsNoAdditional search terms
pageNoPage number (1-based)
page_sizeNoResults per page
phaseNoFilter by clinical trial phase
recruiting_statusNoFilter by recruiting status
sexNoFilter by biological sex
study_typeNoFilter by study type

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does well by specifying prerequisites, location search constraints (mutual exclusivity, geocoding requirement, distance parameter dependency), and return format (formatted list with key details). However, it doesn't mention rate limits, authentication needs, or potential errors.

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 well-structured with a clear purpose statement, prerequisite warning, parameter categories, location notes, and return format - all in 6 sentences. It's appropriately sized for a complex tool with 16 parameters, though the location notes could be slightly more concise.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (16 parameters, no annotations, but with output schema), the description provides good contextual coverage. It explains the tool's purpose, prerequisites, parameter categories, location constraints, and return format. The output schema existence means the description doesn't need to detail return values, making this reasonably 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 16 parameters thoroughly. The description adds some value by grouping parameters into categories (conditions, interventions, location, phase, eligibility) and providing location-specific semantics, but doesn't significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool searches ClinicalTrials.gov for clinical studies based on multiple criteria, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'trial_getter' or 'search', which might have overlapping functionality.

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 a clear prerequisite to use the 'think' tool first for planning research strategy, which is excellent guidance. It also mentions location search constraints (use either term or coordinates, not both). However, it doesn't explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'trial_getter' or 'search' among the siblings.

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

Related 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/genomoncology/biomcp'

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