OpenRepro ledger

Check whether a paper reproduced

check_paper

Read-onlyIdempotent

Look up one paper in the OpenRepro ledger and return its re-run outcome with its qualifiers (such as a broad bound or a check that missed), how many agent-designated controls were excluded and how many gates the test had (when it has any), how many headline claims held, the assurance level, and links to the report and evidence. Matches arXiv IDs, DOIs, URLs, titles, short names and aliases. With no exact match it returns close matches when there are any, and says the paper is not in the ledger only when there are none.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "paper": "<paper>"
    },
    "name": "check_paper"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`paper`	Yes	arXiv ID (1607.01759), DOI (10.1126/science.abb9789), an arXiv/doi.org/openrepro.org URL, the paper's title, or a name it is known by (fastText, PINNs, the Leiden algorithm)

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedNov 10, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior, and the description adds substantial context on top: partial-match fallback, the exact not-found message condition, and a full inventory of returned fields. This is exactly the kind of value the description should provide beyond structured metadata.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and the fallback rule closes the description, with no filler sentences. The middle enumeration of return fields is long but each item maps to a distinct piece of output, so it earns its space.

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 carries the burden of describing return values and does so comprehensively, including the ambiguous-outcome qualifiers. For a single-parameter lookup tool, an agent has everything needed to call it and interpret results.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter already lists example identifiers, so the description's list of accepted identifier forms (arXiv IDs, DOIs, URLs, titles, short names, aliases) largely restates the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Look up one paper in the OpenRepro ledger') and enumerates the returned payload (re-run outcome, qualifiers, excluded controls, gate counts, claims held, assurance level, links). The single-paper framing distinguishes it from sibling search_reports and get_report without needing to name them.

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 one-paper lookup scope makes the usage context clear, and the fallback rule ('returns close matches when there are any, and says the paper is not in the ledger only when there are none') gives concrete behavioral guidance for the miss case. It stops short of explicitly saying when to prefer this over search_reports or get_report.

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

All OpenRepro ledger 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?