Official STRING Database MCP Server

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

STRING: Create a downloadable STRING result file

string_create_file

Create a downloadable TSV, CSV, or JSON file from STRING protein interaction, enrichment, or network results when the user asks to save or export data.

Instructions

Creates a downloadable file for STRING-derived results.

Use this tool when the user explicitly asks to download, save, export, or receive a file containing STRING data, tables, protein lists, enrichment results, networks, etc.

When a response would otherwise include a publication-style or supplementary result table, or another table clearly intended for reuse outside chat, mention that a downloadable TSV/CSV file can be generated on request. Ask whether they want the file, unless they already requested it. Do not create the file until the user asks for it.

Do not store unrelated data or full conversation transcripts.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`content`	Yes	STRING-derived file content. For .tsv/.csv: one rectangular table, one header row, matching delimiter, no Markdown/prose/repeated headers/multiple tables. Use one row per entity, edge, cluster member, annotation, or enrichment term. Use bare numeric scores/FDR/p-values; put interpretation and caveats in chat or .md/.txt.
`filename`	Yes	Suggested output filename with a safe extension such as .tsv, .csv, .json, .md, or .txt. Match content to the extension; prefer .tsv for reusable tabular STRING data. Use a concise name that reflects the STRING analysis result.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.13.0Sep 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful behavior: create-on-demand gating, a guardrail against storing unrelated data/transcripts, and content-shape expectations. It omits though what happens on overwrite, size limits, storage location, or error conditions for a write tool.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then proceeds to usage rules and guardrails with no filler; every sentence is functional. It is somewhat long, with the proactive-mention paragraph reading more as agent workflow policy than tool definition, but nothing is wasted.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and params are fully schema-documented. Usage and gating behavior are well covered; only secondary write-behavior details (overwrite, limits, failures) are absent, which is minor given the strengths.

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% and the two parameters (content, filename) have rich inline descriptions covering format, delimiter, extension matching, and naming. The description adds nothing about parameters, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Creates a downloadable file for STRING-derived results') and its role is unmistakable against the analysis-oriented siblings, none of which produce files. An agent can immediately tell this is the export/serialization tool rather than an analysis tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly defines when to use it ('when the user explicitly asks to download, save, export, or receive a file'), supplies a proactive-trigger scenario for publication-style tables, and crucially states when NOT to act ('Do not create the file until the user asks for it'). This is near-complete invocation routing.

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

Deploy Server