Skip to main content
Glama

Scholar Sidekick

by io.github.mlava

Format Citation

formatCitation
Read-onlyIdempotent

Format scholarly identifiers into a finished citation in a specific style. Use when the user wants a paste-ready citation string for a manuscript, slide, message, footnote, or in-line reference. Style defaults to vancouver if unspecified; ask the user before defaulting if any ambiguity exists (e.g. 'Harvard' and 'Chicago' have multiple variants — confirm which one). Supports five hand-tuned builtins (vancouver, ama, apa, ieee, cse) plus any of 10,000+ CSL style IDs (chicago-author-date, harvard-cite-them-right, modern-language-association, nature, bmj, the-lancet, etc.). Alias and dependent-style resolution apply, so 'harvard' resolves to 'harvard-cite-them-right' and the canonical ID is reported back as styleUsed. Output defaults to text; pass output=html for marked-up HTML or output=json for structured CSL items. Accepts the same identifier formats as resolveIdentifier (DOI/PMID/PMCID/ISBN/arXiv/ISSN/ADS/WHO IRIS, prefixes tolerated), single or comma/newline-separated batch — one round trip per call. Returns: one of { text, html, items } depending on the output parameter, followed by a metadata block ({formatter: 'builtin' | 'csl', styleUsed, requestId, warnings?}) appended as a second text content item — surface this to the user when they care about reproducibility. Use resolveIdentifier instead when the user wants raw metadata to inspect or transform; use exportCitation when they want a downloadable bibliography file. Read-only and idempotent — safe to retry. Works anonymously against the public Scholar Sidekick API (rate-limited free tier); set SCHOLAR_API_KEY (a free ssk_ key from https://scholar-sidekick.com/account) for higher limits, or RAPIDAPI_KEY for paid RapidAPI tiers. Rate limits follow your tier.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
langNoLocale for formatting (e.g. en-US, en-GB, fr-FR)
textYesOne or more identifiers (DOIs, PMIDs, ISBNs, arXiv IDs, etc.) separated by newlines or commas
styleNoCitation style: vancouver (default), ama, apa, ieee, cse, or any CSL style ID
outputNoOutput format (default: text)
footnoteNoFormat as footnotes instead of bibliography entries

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
htmlNoFormatted citation HTML (when output=html).
langNoLocale used for formatting.
textNoFormatted citation text (when output=text).
itemsNoStructured CSL items (when output=json).
warningsNo
formatterNoWhich engine formatted: 'builtin' or 'csl'.
styleUsedNoCanonical style ID after alias/dependent-style resolution.

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A5/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations: it details read-only/idempotent behavior, rate limits, API key requirements, output format semantics, metadata block structure, and style resolution (e.g., 'harvard' resolves to 'harvard-cite-them-right'). No contradictions 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?

The description is lengthy but every sentence carries essential information, with the purpose and usage front-loaded. It avoids redundancy and organizes complex details (style resolution, output formats, rate limits) into a coherent flow without waste.

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 the tool's complexity (5 parameters, output schema, many alternatives, and nuanced behavior), the description covers all aspects: return structure (text/html/items + metadata block), authentication tiers, rate limiting, style resolution, batch processing, and when-to-use alternatives. It is exceptionally 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?

Although the schema already covers all parameters at 100%, the description adds substantial meaning: style defaults, builtins vs. CSL, alias resolution, batch input format (newline/comma separated, one round trip), and the output parameter returning text/html/items. It enriches every parameter beyond schema definitions.

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 formats scholarly identifiers into a finished citation with a specific style. It distinguishes from siblings by contrasting with resolveIdentifier (raw metadata) and exportCitation (bibliography file), making its unique purpose unambiguous.

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?

It provides explicit use cases ('paste-ready citation string for a manuscript, slide, message, footnote, or in-line reference'), explicit alternatives, and even warns about style ambiguity ('Harvard' and 'Chicago' variants) requiring user confirmation before defaulting. This is exemplary guidance.

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

All Scholar Sidekick 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

A4.9/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: auditBibliography is the batch counterpart to verifyCitation, checkOpenAccess focuses on OA status, checkRetraction on retractions, resolveIdentifier returns raw metadata, formatCitation produces citation strings, and exportCitation produces files. Descriptions explicitly cross-reference each other to prevent confusion.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun camelCase pattern: audit, check, check, export, format, resolve, verify + object. There is no mixing of styles or vague verbs.

Tool Count5/5

With 7 tools, the server is well-scoped for its purpose of citation verification and formatting. Each tool covers a distinct operational need (batch audit, single verify, OA, retraction, format, export, resolve) without bloat.

Completeness5/5

The toolset covers the full citation lifecycle: verifying a single citation, auditing entire bibliographies, checking retraction and open-access status, formatting citations, exporting to common bibliography formats, and resolving identifiers to metadata. No obvious gaps exist for the stated domain.

Resources