Skip to main content
Glama

Scholar Feed

by io.github.YGao2005

Create Collection

create_collection

Create a new named collection. MUTATES. If a collection with that name already exists, returns the existing one (get-or-create — never errors on duplicate). Use "/" to nest under a folder, e.g. "AgentOPA/Formal" — the folder is derived from the name, so there is no parent to create first. Requires SF_API_KEY.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameYesName for the collection, e.g. 'KV-cache compression'. Use '/' to nest: 'AgentOPA/Formal' files it under an 'AgentOPA' folder.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okNoTrue when the operation succeeded.
watchNoThe created/affected watch, when applicable.
actionNoMachine label: saved | no_change | removed | liked | created | updated | deleted.
messageNoHuman-readable summary of the outcome.
arxiv_idNo
collectionNoThe created/affected collection, when applicable.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantial behavioral context: the operation is a mutation, duplicates are idempotent (get-or-create, never errors), folder hierarchy is derived from the name, and SF_API_KEY is required. This goes well beyond the structured fields.

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?

The description is compact and front-loaded: it opens with the primary purpose and mutation warning, then covers duplicate behavior, nesting syntax, and authentication in three purposeful sentences. Every sentence adds needed information with no filler.

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?

Given a single required parameter, complete schema coverage, an output schema, and clear annotations, the description covers everything an agent needs: mutation semantics, duplicate handling, folder derivation, and auth. There are no material gaps for correct invocation.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% for the single 'name' parameter, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds value by clarifying the nesting semantics ('/' creates a folder path) and that the folder is derived entirely from the name, plus the duplicate behavior. This exceeds the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 states a specific action ('Create') on a specific resource ('a new named collection') and immediately flags that it mutates state. It also distinguishes itself from read-only siblings by noting the get-or-create behavior, so an agent can tell it apart from list_collections or add_to_collection.

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 description gives clear, actionable context: create a collection by name, duplicates return the existing collection, and '/' nesting means no parent must be created first. It does not explicitly name alternative tools for when not to use it, but the behavior guidance is specific enough for an agent to make the right call.

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

All Scholar Feed 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

A4.3/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools target a distinct resource and action — search vs. saved-library synthesis vs. citation analysis vs. article metadata — and the descriptions explicitly cross-reference one another to reduce confusion. A few retrieval/analysis tools (get_field_orientation, get_foundational_lineage, get_citations, check_drift) have adjacent purposes and could be misselected without reading their descriptions carefully.

Naming Consistency4/5

The overwhelming majority follow a clear verb_noun snake_case pattern: create_watch, delete_watch, list_library, save_paper, annotate_paper, fetch_fulltext, search_papers. Minor deviations like co_author_graph and the interchangeable retrieval verbs (search, find, get, check, ask) create slight inconsistency, but the overall convention is predictable.

Tool Count3/5

27 tools is on the heavy side, but the server covers several coherent subdomains: search/discovery, library/collection management, watches, annotations, and research analysis. The count is justifiable for the broad purpose, though some of the discovery/analysis tools could likely be consolidated or split into a separate server.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core lifecycle well: search, fetch, save, organize into collections, annotate, watch for new papers, and analyze citations/authors/gaps. Minor gaps exist — there is no collection deletion/rename, no explicit mark-as-read tool, and no unlike operation — but these are workable edge cases rather than blocking omissions.

Resources