New Mexico Literacy Project

nmlp_lccn_lookup

Resolve a Library of Congress Catalog Card Number (LCCN) to title, author, year, publisher, ISBN, and ASIN. The missing barcode for pre-ISBN (pre-1967) books: users read the number off the copyright page ('Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 63-12345'). Dashes and spaces optional. Backed by 20M+ Library of Congress and Open Library records. Human tool: https://newmexicoliteracyproject.org/lccn-lookup

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`lccn`	Yes	The number as printed, e.g. '63-12345', '637996', 'sa 64-9056', '2006023629'

TDQS

A4.2/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden. It discloses the returned fields, database size (20M+ records), and provides a human tool URL. It does not mention any destructive side effects, but the tool is clearly a read-only lookup.

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?

The description is concise and front-loaded, starting with the core purpose. It contains useful details without being overly verbose, though the human tool URL at the end is slightly extraneous for an AI agent.

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?

The tool has one parameter and no output schema or annotations. The description fully explains the input format, output fields, and data source, making it complete for an AI agent to use correctly.

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?

The schema already covers the single parameter with examples (100% coverage). The description adds context about dashes and spaces being optional and where to find the number, but this does not significantly enhance the schema's own description.

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 it resolves an LCCN to title, author, year, publisher, ISBN, and ASIN. It explains what an LCCN is and where to find it, making the purpose specific and distinct from siblings like nmlp_search_titles.

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?

It provides context for when to use the tool (for pre-ISBN books, reading number off copyright page) and mentions the data source. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among the sibling tools.

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

All New Mexico Literacy Project tools Inspect

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

A3.9/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose, from specific identifier lookups (CD, vinyl, LCCN) to donation logistics and first-edition identification. The general resolver (nmlp_resolve) is complementary and well-differentiated.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent pattern: 'nmlp_' prefix with descriptive snake_case names (e.g., nmlp_check_coverage, nmlp_identify_first_edition). There is no mixing of conventions.

Tool Count4/5

At 16 tools, the count is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but each tool serves a non-trivial and distinct function across book identification, media lookup, and donation management, justifying the number.

Completeness4/5

The server covers core identification workflows (first editions, number lines, publisher rules, various identifiers) and donation operations, but lacks appraisal/pricing tools and more granular donation status tracking, which are minor gaps.

Resources

Need Help?