Skip to main content
Glama
yeyuan98

BioMCP

by yeyuan98
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

drug_get

Read-only

Retrieve comprehensive drug information by name, covering regulatory status, safety, targets, indications, and adverse events. Specify sections to tailor results for pharmacovigilance or drug research.

Instructions

Get detailed drug information by name

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesDrug name (e.g., "imatinib", "aspirin")
limitNo
sectionsNoSections to include (adverse_events = FDA FAERS adverse reactions ranked by report count; limit applies to reaction rows)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changedv1.1.1
    • changedInput schema / properties / sections / description
      Previous value: -"Sections to include"New value: +"Sections to include (adverse_events = FDA FAERS adverse reactions ranked by report count; limit applies to reaction rows)"
    • changedInput schema / properties / sections / items / enum
      Previous value: -[
-  "core",
-  "us_regulatory",
-  "eu_regulatory",
-  "who_regulatory",
-  "safety",
-  "targets",
-  "indications",
-  "all"
-]New value: +[
+  "core",
+  "us_regulatory",
+  "eu_regulatory",
+  "who_regulatory",
+  "safety",
+  "targets",
+  "indications",
+  "adverse_events",
+  "all"
+]
  2. First observedv0.1.8

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds little behavioral context beyond that: it does not state return shape, exact-match behavior, or how sections and limit affect output.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. 'Detailed' is slightly generic, but the structure is clear and easy to parse.

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?

For a read-only get-by-name tool, the description plus schema and annotations are mostly sufficient. Missing pieces include any indication of what the response looks like or what happens when a drug is not found, but the tool's simplicity reduces the severity of these omissions.

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 schema already documents the 'name' and 'sections' parameters well, including the meaning of the adverse_events section and that limit applies to reaction rows. The description only restates the name parameter; it adds no meaning 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 verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed drug information') with a lookup key ('by name'). It is more specific than a vague tool description, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools like drug_search or drug_trials.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The phrase 'by name' implies this is for exact-name lookups rather than keyword search, which is useful usage context. However, no explicit guidance is given about when to choose this tool over drug_search or other drug-related alternatives.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools