Skip to main content
Glama

Source Library

by io.github.Embassy-of-the-Free-Mind

Find a Canonical Reference (Bekker / Stephanus)

get_locus
Read-onlyIdempotent

Turn a CANONICAL CITATION into the actual leaves that carry it. Aristotle is cited by Bekker number (1094a8, 1447a) and Plato by Stephanus number (Rep. 328b) — the references scholarship has used for centuries, which survive re-typesetting and are shareable in a way a scan page never is. USE THIS FIRST whenever a passage arrives as a canonical reference rather than a page: do not try to derive the page yourself from a book's pagination, which is what produced a wrong guess before this tool existed. Bekker numbers are unique across the whole Aristotelian corpus, so the number alone is enough and it also tells you WHICH WORK you are citing. Stephanus numbers restart in each of the three 1578 volumes, so pass work ("Republic", "Timaeus") — without it the response lists the candidate dialogues instead of choosing one. Returns every witness the library holds: the Greek reference edition and, where we have one, an English translation of the same lines, each with its scan page, a reader URL and a quote_api link — so you can compare the original against a translation at one reference. Then call get_quote with the returned book_id + page for the verbatim text and a citable shortlink. LIMITS, stated plainly: a witness is only returned where the reference is PRINTED on that leaf (or, in the two root editions, where a verified constant offset brackets it) — nothing is interpolated, so an empty result means this library holds no anchored leaf there, NOT that the citation is wrong; editions_searched shows what was consulted and the range each covers. Line numbers (the "8" of 1094a8) are not resolved — you get the right leaf and read the line off it. Two works can share a page where one ends and the next begins (Bekker 184 and 1447 are both such joins), and each leaf is filed by the running head printed on it, so a reference at the very start of a work may come back under its predecessor — always read other_works_at_this_reference before concluding a passage is absent. A bare number that exists in both systems returns Aristotle and Plato leaves together; check the system field on each.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
workNoThe work or dialogue, when the reference needs it (Plato always does): "Republic", "Timaeus", "Laws", "Nicomachean Ethics", "Poetics". Greek or Latin titles as printed in the editions also resolve.
systemNoOptional: "bekker" or "stephanus". Inferred from the work when omitted; do not guess it from the number, since the two ranges overlap.
referenceYesThe canonical reference: "1094a8", "1094a", "1447", "328b". A leading system name is accepted ("Bekker 1094a"), as is a work name ("Rep. 328b").

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds substantial behavioral detail beyond that: it explains that witnesses are only returned when the reference is printed on the leaf, that nothing is interpolated, that empty results mean no anchored leaf exists (not that the citation is wrong), and that line numbers are not resolved. It also discloses edge cases like shared pages and bare-number ambiguity across systems. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Though lengthy, every sentence adds value. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose, then usage, return values, limitations, and edge cases in a logical flow. It avoids fluff and uses plain-language warnings (e.g., 'LIMITS, stated plainly'). The structure is coherent despite being a single block of text.

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

Completeness5/5

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

With no output schema, the description must explain return values, and it does: it describes the Greek reference edition, English translation, scan page, reader URL, and quote_api link. It also covers behaviors like editions_searched and other_works_at_this_reference. Given the tool's complexity (two citation systems, edge cases, follow-up calls), the description is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description enriches the parameters significantly. It explains why 'work' is required for Stephanus numbers (they restart per volume) and that omitting it yields candidate dialogues. For 'system', it warns not to guess it from the number since ranges overlap. For 'reference', it clarifies accepted formats and the ambiguity of bare numbers. This adds meaning well beyond 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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Turn a CANONICAL CITATION into the actual leaves that carry it.' It clearly distinguishes itself from page-based lookup tools and explicitly names the citation systems (Bekker/Stephanus). It also differentiates from get_quote by explaining the tool's output is leaves, not verbatim text.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

The description provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'USE THIS FIRST whenever a passage arrives as a canonical reference rather than a page' and warns against deriving the page manually. It also gives a clear follow-up action: 'Then call get_quote with the returned book_id + page.' It mentions exclusions (e.g., line numbers are not resolved) and how to avoid misinterpretation (read other_works_at_this_reference), satisfying the highest bar.

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

All Source Library 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

A4.5/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Tools are organized around distinct actions—discover, read, cite, search, contribute—and the descriptions cross-reference each other heavily. The only mild ambiguities are the get_quote/get_quotes pair and the multiple passage-search variants, which overlap in result type but are scoped differently.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools use snake_case verb_noun names with predictable prefixes: get_* for retrieval, list_* for catalog enumeration, search_* for discovery, and plain verb_noun for contribution actions. Pluralization and compound nouns like get_book_text are minor variations that do not break the pattern.

Tool Count5/5

Fifteen tools is at the upper end of the ideal range, but every tool maps to a distinct step in the library workflow: discovery, reading, citation, search, editions, images, and community contributions. None feels redundant or decorative.

Completeness5/5

The surface covers the full research lifecycle: discovering books, reading them, locating canonical references, citing exact pages, searching by keyword/meaning/within a book, comparing editions, finding images, and contributing findings back. The pipeline from get_book to get_book_text to get_quote provides clear forward paths with no dead ends.

Resources