Hugging Bay

get_citation_pack

Read-only

Get source-backed citation records for a query.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`q`	No
`slug`	No
`query`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedOct 28, 2026
- removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```
- removedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -true
```
Changed3 schema fields changedOct 26, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / q / description
```
Removed value: -"Text to search for."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / query / description
```
Removed value: -"Text to search for."
```
- removedInput schema / properties / slug / description
```
Removed value: -"Topic, pack or ranking name from its list."
```

Changed4 schema fields changedOct 10, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / q / description
```
Added value: +"Text to search for."
```
addedInput schema / properties / query / description
```
Added value: +"Text to search for."
```

addedInput schema / properties / slug / description

Added value: +"Topic, pack or ranking name from its list."

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "additionalProperties": true,
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedJul 11, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe, closed-world read. The description adds only that records are 'source-backed', with no mention of pagination, result shape, or what happens on an empty match; with annotations carrying the safety profile, a 3 is fair.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, but the brevity comes at the cost of the parameter disambiguation the tool needs.

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

Completeness2/5

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

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but a three-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and no required parameters needs the description to explain which input to supply. That critical disambiguation is absent, leaving the definition incomplete for correct invocation.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and three string parameters (q, slug, query) are entirely undocumented. The description says 'for a query' but never resolves the q-vs-query overlap or explains what slug selects, which is the single biggest ambiguity an agent faces here.

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 and resource ('Get ... citation records') with a scope qualifier ('for a query'), which is enough to distinguish it from the artifact/general lookup siblings. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from near-neighbors like get_source_coverage or search_artifacts, so it stops short of a 5.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this tool, when not to, or which sibling to pick instead (e.g. get_source_coverage vs search_artifacts). The only hint is the phrase 'for a query', which leaves selection entirely to inference.

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

All Hugging Bay tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Shareable, User-Owned Context BackendPeople, applications, and agents read, write, and coordinate together in one context lake. Reach it over MCP, a CLI, a Python SDK, or REST.fulcradynamics.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?