Skip to main content
Glama
musharna

plant-genomics-mcp

kegg_pathways

Fetch KEGG pathway memberships for an Arabidopsis locus. Returns pathway IDs, names, and category classes the locus participates in.

Instructions

Fetch KEGG pathway memberships for an Arabidopsis locus from rest.kegg.jp. Returns a list of pathway IDs + names + KEGG category classes the locus participates in. Pairs with locus_go_annotations for the GO-level functional view. Multi-organism caveat (v1.1.0): the organism= field accepts any plant in the matrix for symmetry with the other backends, but only arabidopsis_thaliana resolves — KEGG uses NCBI Entrez Gene IDs for rice/maize/etc. and our cross-backend locus contract can't produce those yet, so any other organism raises OrganismNotSupported before any HTTP call. KEGG v118+ is case-sensitive on the locus: pass AGI loci as uppercase.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locusYesArabidopsis AGI locus, e.g. AT1G01010 (case preserved verbatim — KEGG v118+ is case-sensitive)
organismNoPlant organism — only arabidopsis_thaliana is supported in v1.1.0; other plants raise OrganismNotSupported until an Entrez bridge landsarabidopsis_thaliana

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
locusYes
organismYesResolved canonical organism slug, e.g. arabidopsis_thaliana
kegg_gene_idYese.g. "ath:at1g01010"
entrez_gene_idNoEntrez Gene ID from the non-Arabidopsis KEGG↔Entrez bridge; absent for ath.
pathwaysYes
errorsNoPer-pathway step-2 failures (kept inline so the call doesn't abort)
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it makes an HTTP call to rest.kegg.jp, is case-sensitive on locus, and raises OrganismNotSupported for unsupported organisms. This provides transparency about limitations and behavior.

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 moderately verbose but each sentence adds value, covering purpose, return type, pairing, and caveats. It front-loads the main action and is structured logically without redundancy.

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 existence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the tool's purpose, parameters, limitations, and pairing suggestion. It is complete for a tool with two simple parameters and no nested objects.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds meaning by explaining the locus format as AGI, emphasizing case sensitivity, and detailing the organism parameter's default and limitation. This enhances understanding 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 tool fetches KEGG pathway memberships for an Arabidopsis locus from rest.kegg.jp, listing pathway IDs, names, and category classes. It distinguishes itself from siblings by mentioning pairing with locus_go_annotations for a GO-level view.

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 explains when to use (for KEGG pathways) and provides a caveat about organism support, warning that only arabidopsis_thaliana is supported in v1.1.0. It mentions pairing with locus_go_annotations but does not explicitly state when not to use or alternative tools.

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