BrunoSan ArXiv Intelligence

arxiv_search_papers

Full-text search over the live cs.AI/ML paper graph using FTS5.

Searches title AND abstract. Supports boolean operators:
  AND, OR, NOT, phrase matching ("exact phrase"), prefix (term*).

Args:
    query:         FTS5 search query. E.g. 'LoRA fine-tuning', '"chain of thought"', 'RLHF NOT PPO'
    category:      Filter by primary category. Options: cs.AI, cs.LG, cs.CL, cs.CV, cs.RO
    date_from:     ISO date filter, e.g. '2024-01-01'
    date_to:       ISO date filter, e.g. '2025-12-31'
    empirical_only: Only papers marked as empirical by LLM pass (if available)
    has_code_only:  Only papers with code release (llm_has_code=1, if available)
    limit:         Max results (default: 20, max: 50)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No
`query`	Yes
`api_key`	No	BrunoSan API Key — brunosan.de/intelligence/
`date_to`	No
`category`	No
`date_from`	No
`has_code_only`	No
`empirical_only`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedSep 14, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It reveals search scope (title+abstract), boolean operators, and conditional availability of empirical/code flags, but omits the return format, authentication requirements (api_key), and any side effects or rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation safety hints.

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 description is well-structured with a clear opening, operator explanation, and a bulleted argument list. It is longer than minimal but every sentence adds value, and the most critical information (purpose and query syntax) is front-loaded. Slightly verbose due to repeated parameter details, but efficient overall.

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 search tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers parameter semantics thoroughly but omits the return format and authentication details. It does not state what the results look like or that an API key may be needed, which are essential for correct invocation. The lack of an output schema increases the burden, making this only partially complete.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema description coverage is only 13% (only api_key has a schema description). The description compensates thoroughly by explaining every other parameter: query syntax with examples, category options, date format, boolean flags, and limit defaults/max. It adds meaning well beyond the bare schema, making all parameters self-documenting.

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 the tool performs full-text search over the cs.AI/ML paper graph, specifying it searches title and abstract. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like arxiv_get_paper or arxiv_top_authors, making its purpose immediately recognizable.

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?

The description implies usage by describing search capabilities but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when to prefer this tool over siblings. It provides query examples but no exclusion criteria or alternative tool references, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the purpose.

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

All BrunoSan ArXiv Intelligence 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?