Skip to main content
Glama

adamamer20-paper-search-mcp-openai

by ai.smithery
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

search_medrxiv

Search academic papers from medRxiv.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes
max_resultsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed7 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / $schema
      Added value: +"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • removedInput schema / properties / max_results / title
      Removed value: -"Max Results"
    • changedInput schema / properties / max_results / type
      Previous value: -"integer"New value: +"number"
    • removedInput schema / properties / query / title
      Removed value: -"Query"
    • removedInput schema / title
      Removed value: -"search_medrxivArguments"
    • changedOutput schema / (root)
      Previous value: -{
-  "properties": {
-    "result": {
-      "items": {
-        "additionalProperties": true,
-        "type": "object"
-      },
-      "title": "Result",
-      "type": "array"
-    }
-  },
-  "required": [
-    "result"
-  ],
-  "title": "search_medrxivOutput",
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure but fails to mention critical traits such as rate limits, query syntax support, pagination behavior, or whether results include full abstracts. The implied read-only nature of 'search' is the only behavioral hint.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and contains no filler words, with every word earning its place. However, the extreme brevity contributes to under-specification in other dimensions, though structurally it is efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the 0% schema coverage, lack of output schema, and absence of annotations, the description is inadequate for the tool's complexity. The 6-word description provides no guidance on return format, error handling, or parameter details necessary for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters1/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description completely fails to compensate by explaining parameter semantics. It does not describe what the 'query' parameter expects (keywords, boolean operators, phrases) or clarify the 'max_results' parameter's behavior beyond the schema's default value.

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 (Search) and resource (academic papers from medRxiv), and distinguishes itself from sibling search tools by explicitly naming the medRxiv repository. However, it lacks specificity about search capabilities (e.g., full-text vs. title search) that would elevate it to a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the numerous sibling search tools (search_arxiv, search_pubmed, etc.) or how it relates to download/read operations for medRxiv papers. No prerequisites or exclusion criteria are mentioned.

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

All adamamer20-paper-search-mcp-openai toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources