Skip to main content
Glama

OpenArx

by ai.openarx

find_by_id

Find a paper by any external identifier: OpenArx ID (oarx-…), DOI, arXiv ID, Semantic Scholar Corpus ID, DBLP ID. arXiv-style DOIs (10.48550/arXiv.) are auto-resolved to the underlying arxiv_id even if the doi field is not stored. An identifier resolves to one specific version of a document, not to a mutable current state, so a reference cannot silently come to mean different text.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doiNoDOI (e.g. 10.1234/...). arXiv-style DOIs (10.48550/arXiv.1706.03762) are auto-resolved to arXiv lookup; non-arXiv DOIs require the doi to be present in externalIds.
s2_idNoSemantic Scholar Corpus ID
run_idNoOptional. The active methodist run_id (as returned by the methodist diagnose / get_current_dose door). Pass it whenever you call this tool while working inside a run, so the call is attributed to that run for the §8 usage crosscheck — attribution is run-anchored, so it stays correct even if your access token refreshes mid-run. Must be YOUR run: a run_id owned by a different principal, or a non-existent run_id, is rejected.
dblp_idNoDBLP key like "conf/iclr/HuSWALWWC22" or "journals/corr/abs-1706-03762"
oarx_idNoOpenArx ID (e.g. oarx-f629d9b6a1c2e3d4). Legacy 8-hex ids (oarx-f629d9b6) are also accepted and resolved by prefix.
arxiv_idNoarXiv ID (e.g. 1706.03762)

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses important behaviors: auto-resolution of arXiv-style DOIs, that identifiers resolve to specific versions (not mutable state), and run_id attribution requirements. This goes well beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences, all meaningful and front-loaded. No wasted words. Each sentence adds essential information.

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?

No output schema exists, so the description should ideally indicate what the tool returns. It does not mention the response format or content, leaving a gap in completeness despite good behavioral detail.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining auto-resolution for arXiv DOIs and the run_id attribution purpose, which are not in the schema descriptions.

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 it finds a paper by external identifiers, listing specific ID types (OpenArx, DOI, arXiv, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform search or retrieval by other means.

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 implies usage when an exact identifier is available, but does not explicitly exclude using it for keyword search or recommend alternatives. The context from sibling tools helps, but more explicit guidance would be better.

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

All OpenArx 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear distinct purposes, but some overlap exists between explore_topic and methodist_explore_topic, and between find_related and find_related_claims. Descriptions generally differentiate them well.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern with methodist_ prefix for research workflow tools, though 'paginate' and 'methodist' (without underscore) are minor deviations.

Tool Count2/5

35 tools is too many for a single server's scope, exceeding the 25+ threshold. The server combines two major workflows (literature search and research process guidance), which would be better split.

Completeness4/5

The tool set covers a wide range of operations: multiple search modes, document submission and versioning, topic exploration, evidence checking, methodology search, and research guidance. Minor gaps include lack of document deletion or metadata update without new version.

Resources