Skip to main content
Glama

Pride

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Search Projects

search_projects
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search EBI PRIDE Archive — the largest public proteomics/mass-spectrometry dataset repository — for projects by keyword (disease, organism, technique, protein, instrument). Returns matching project accessions with title, organisms, diseases, and instruments. Keyless.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoZero-based page index (default 0).
limitNoMax results per page (default 20, max 100).
keywordYesFree-text search term, e.g. "breast cancer", "SARS-CoV-2", "TMT".

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / examples
      Added value: +[
+  {
+    "keyword": "breast cancer"
+  },
+  {
+    "keyword": "SARS-CoV-2",
+    "limit": 50,
+    "page": 0
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds extra behavioral context beyond the annotations: it highlights that the tool is 'Keyless' (no authentication required) and explains the return payload structure (accessions, title, organisms, diseases, instruments). This meaningfully supplements the structured hints.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and every clause earns its place. It communicates the repository, keyword scope, return format, and auth requirement without any redundancy or unnecessary detail.

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?

For a simple 3-parameter read-only search tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it tells the agent what to search, where, what to expect in response, and that no key is required. Pagination details are covered by the schema, so nothing essential is missing.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description goes further by elaborating on the 'keyword' parameter, listing example categories (disease, organism, technique, protein, instrument) that help the agent construct effective queries. This adds value beyond the schema's brief free-text description.

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?

Description clearly states it searches the EBI PRIDE Archive for projects by keyword, specifying the exact repository and types of keywords (disease, organism, technique, protein, instrument). It also lists the return fields (accessions, title, organisms, diseases, instruments), making the tool's scope and function unambiguous and distinct from siblings.

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 for when to use the tool (when searching for projects in the EBI PRIDE Archive) and what it returns. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions, but the specificity of the repository and use case serves as sufficient guidance in the context of the sibling tools.

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

All Pride toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

ask_pipeworx_beta is explicitly identical to ask_pipeworx right now, creating a true duplicate. The six-tool Polymarket family (bet_research, polymarket_arbitrage, polymarket_edges, polymarket_edge_tracker, polymarket_fill_risk, polymarket_kalshi_spread) plus discover_tools vs suggest_questions give agents overlapping entry points that require deep reading to disambiguate.

Naming Consistency3/5

Sub-families are internally consistent (ask_pipeworx_*, polymarket_*, remember/recall/forget), but the server mixes verb_noun, domain_noun, and bare-verb styles across tools. bet_research breaks the polymarket_ prefix pattern, and ai_visibility_check vs scan_competitor_ai_presence use different words for the same underlying concept.

Tool Count2/5

33 tools is heavy and spans at least six unrelated domains: a data-gateway, prediction markets, key-value memory, subscription management, PRIDE proteomics, and standalone utilities (generate_llms_txt, scan_dependency). The scope is so broad that it feels like multiple servers merged into one, making the surface hard to navigate.

Completeness4/5

The dominant data-query domain is well covered: query, grounded query, deep research, profiles, comparison, change feeds, validation, entity resolution, and discovery are all present. Subscription and memory lifecycles are complete, and the prediction-market research surface is thorough; minor gaps exist only in peripheral areas like PRIDE project download/file details.

Resources