Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In

HypePaper

by app.hypepaper
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

library_papers_with_method

Your personal library: Papers that use the given Method node id. [Free · 1 credit]

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "method_id": "<method_id>"
    },
    "name": "library_papers_with_method"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
method_idYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observed

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the cost model ('Free · 1 credit'), which is real behavioral context, but says nothing about return format, result limits, or behavior on an unknown method_id.

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?

Two compact clauses with the resource and scope front-loaded and the cost tag appended. No wasted wording, though the bracketed credit note is slightly cryptic without context.

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 simple one-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers what is returned (papers) and the cost, but leaves the parameter's expected format and result shape unaddressed.

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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single method_id parameter is undocumented in the schema. The description partially compensates by clarifying that the value is a Method node id (not a name or free-text query), but gives no format or sourcing details.

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?

States a specific verb+resource: papers that use a given Method node id, scoped to 'your personal library'. The 'Method node id' qualifier implicitly separates it from library_papers_with_concept, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied by the 'personal library' scoping and the requirement of a Method node id, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites (e.g., how to obtain a method node id), and no named alternative for concept-based lookups.

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

All HypePaper 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