Skip to main content
Glama

search_by_target

Find compounds tested against specific biological targets like genes or proteins, filtering by activity types such as IC50 or Ki to identify relevant chemical data.

Instructions

Find compounds tested against a specific biological target

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
targetYesTarget name (gene, protein, or pathway)
activity_typeNoType of activity (e.g., IC50, EC50, Ki)
max_recordsNoMaximum number of results (1-1000, default: 100)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler function that executes the logic for the 'search_by_target' tool. Currently implemented as a placeholder.
    private async handleSearchByTarget(args: any) {
      return { content: [{ type: 'text', text: JSON.stringify({ message: 'Target search not yet implemented', args }, null, 2) }] };
    }
  • Tool definition including name, description, and input schema for 'search_by_target'.
    {
      name: 'search_by_target',
      description: 'Find compounds tested against a specific biological target',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          target: { type: 'string', description: 'Target name (gene, protein, or pathway)' },
          activity_type: { type: 'string', description: 'Type of activity (e.g., IC50, EC50, Ki)' },
          max_records: { type: 'number', description: 'Maximum number of results (1-1000, default: 100)', minimum: 1, maximum: 1000 },
        },
        required: ['target'],
      },
  • src/index.ts:786-787 (registration)
    Registration/dispatch of the 'search_by_target' handler in the main tool switch statement.
    case 'search_by_target':
      return await this.handleSearchByTarget(args);
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 of behavioral disclosure. It mentions 'Find compounds tested against a specific biological target' but doesn't cover critical aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, potential rate limits, authentication needs, or what the output format looks like. For a search tool with zero annotation coverage, this is a significant gap.

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?

The description is a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a tool with a straightforward function, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It states what the tool does but lacks behavioral context and usage guidelines, which are crucial for an agent to operate effectively in a server with many sibling tools.

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?

The description adds no parameter semantics beyond what the input schema provides. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the baseline score is 3. The schema already documents 'target', 'activity_type', and 'max_records' with descriptions and constraints, so the description doesn't need to compensate but also doesn't add extra value.

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's purpose with a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('compounds tested against a specific biological target'), making it immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'search_compounds' or 'search_bioassays', which might have overlapping functionality, preventing a perfect score.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'search_compounds' and 'search_bioassays', there's no indication of context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to guess based on the name alone.

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/k-lordbodin7/PubChem-MCP-Server'

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