Skip to main content
Glama
musharna

plant-genomics-mcp

by musharna

InterPro: Protein Domains

interpro_domains
Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve the InterPro domain architecture for a plant gene locus. Resolves the locus to a UniProt protein and returns all InterPro entries with type, source, and residue spans, plus a count by type.

Instructions

Fetch the InterPro domain / family architecture for a locus (www.ebi.ac.uk/interpro; free, no key). Resolves the locus → UniProt accession, then returns the protein's InterPro entries — each with accession, name, type (domain / family / homologous_superfamily / …), source_database (Pfam appears here as source_database='pfam', not a separate tool), the integrated InterPro accession, and residue spans — plus a count_by_type rollup. A protein with no annotated domains returns found=true with an empty list; a locus with no UniProt entry raises a typed NotFoundError. domain_count is the true total even when the row list is page-capped. Works for all 12 organisms (UniProt-keyed). Defaults to arabidopsis_thaliana; pass organism= for other species.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locusYese.g. AT4G09760 (Arabidopsis), Os01g0100100 (rice RAP-DB)
organismNoPlant organism — accepts canonical slug (arabidopsis_thaliana), scientific or common name, or NCBI taxidarabidopsis_thaliana

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
foundYesTrue once the locus resolved to a UniProt entry
locusYes
domainsYes
accessionYesResolved UniProt accession
truncatedYesTrue if the row list was page-capped (< domain_count)
domain_countYesTotal InterPro entries (pre-cap)
count_by_typeYesRollup of entry count by type
upstream_versionNoInterPro release that produced THIS response, as stated by the upstream's own header (e.g. '109.0'). null means InterPro did not state one — never that no release exists, and never inferred from a separate metadata call, which can describe a different release than the one that answered.
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: the resolution from locus to UniProt, return structure (entries with fields, count_by_type), error handling (NotFoundError for locus without UniProt, empty list for no domains), and pagination note (domain_count is true total).

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, starting with the main purpose. Each sentence adds meaningful information, though it could be slightly more concise. Overall, it earns its length.

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's complexity (2 parameters, output schema exists, rich annotations), the description covers resolution steps, error scenarios, and output fields. The presence of an output schema reduces the burden, but the description still adds important contextual details.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by providing examples for the 'locus' parameter and explaining the format for 'organism' (canonical slug, scientific/common name, NCBI taxid), which goes beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the verb 'Fetch' and resource 'InterPro domain / family architecture'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by noting that Pfam appears as a source_database within this tool, not as a separate tool.

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 when to use: for fetching InterPro domain architecture for a locus. It specifies default organism and how to specify others. It lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives, but the context is sufficient.

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/musharna/plant-genomics-mcp'

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