WritersLogic research agents

manuscript-check

Manuscript Pre-submission Check — Verifies every reference in a manuscript against Crossref, OpenAlex, arXiv and Europe PMC (fabricated, mis-cited, retracted) and runs deterministic prose forensics on the same text. Runs reference-verifier ($0.50) + audit-prose-forensics ($1.00) in one paid call for 20% less than buying them separately. Charged only when every member succeeds.

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": {
      "manuscript": "<manuscript>"
    },
    "name": "manuscript-check"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`genre`	No	Context for the editorial pass only.
`bibtex`	No	BibTeX/BibLaTeX text (the contents of a .bib file).
`manuscript`	Yes	Full manuscript text including its reference list.
`references`	No	Plain-text reference list (numbered, blank-line separated, or one per line; APA, IEEE, Vancouver, Chicago).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 15, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose non-obvious behavior: cost composition, the discount, and the billing rule that the call is charged only when every member succeeds. It does not disclose latency, rate limits, or what a partial/failure result looks like for the caller beyond the charging rule.

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 sentences, tightly front-loaded with the core action and the sources before the commercial framing. Dense but every clause carries information; the parenthetical price list is slightly heavy but justified because it drives tool selection.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description never says what the caller gets back — no structure for per-reference verdicts or forensic findings, and no indication of how the two sub-results are combined. Billing and cost are covered well, but the result contract for a fairly complex composite tool is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents genre, bibtex, manuscript, and references. The description adds no meaning about how references and bibtex interact with manuscript (e.g., are they alternatives or supplements), so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Verifies every reference in a manuscript') and names the concrete external sources (Crossref, OpenAlex, arXiv, Europe PMC) plus the failure classes detected (fabricated, mis-cited, retracted). It also clarifies the second function (deterministic prose forensics), making clear this is a bundle of the two sibling tools rather than either one alone.

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 pricing framing ('runs reference-verifier ($0.50) + audit-prose-forensics ($1.00) in one paid call for 20% less') implicitly tells the agent to prefer this composite when both passes are wanted and to use the individual siblings when only one is needed. It gives clear positive context but never states an explicit exclusion or when-not-to-use condition.

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

All WritersLogic research agents tools Inspect

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

Need Help?