xpay Academic Research Collection

download_crossref

Attempt to download PDF of a CrossRef paper.

Args:
    paper_id: CrossRef DOI (e.g., '10.1038/nature12373').
    save_path: Directory to save the PDF (default: './downloads').
Returns:
    str: Message indicating that direct PDF download is not supported.
    
Note:
    CrossRef is a citation database and doesn't provide direct PDF downloads.
    Use the DOI to access the paper through the publisher's website.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`paper_id`	Yes
`save_path`	No		./downloads

Schema Changelog

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

First observedAug 14, 2026

TDQS

A5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that the tool always returns a message indicating lack of direct download support, and explains why. This fully informs the agent of the tool's limitations without any hidden behavior.

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 well-structured with Args, Returns, and Note sections. It is appropriately sized—each sentence provides necessary information, and it is front-loaded with the primary action in the first line.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers everything: purpose, parameter semantics, behavioral outcome, and alternative usage. It is complete for an agent to correctly invoke and interpret the tool.

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?

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description adds rich meaning: paper_id is described as a CrossRef DOI with an example format, and save_path is explained as the directory to save the PDF with a default value. This goes well beyond the bare schema properties.

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's action ('Attempt to download PDF of a CrossRef paper') and then specifies the actual outcome ('Message indicating that direct PDF download is not supported'). This distinguishes it from sibling download tools by clarifying that CrossRef does not support direct PDF downloads.

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?

The note provides explicit guidance: 'CrossRef is a citation database and doesn't provide direct PDF downloads. Use the DOI to access the paper through the publisher's website.' This tells the user when to use this tool and, more importantly, what alternative to pursue, which is exactly what usage guidelines should do.

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

All xpay Academic Research Collection 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

C2.6/5.0

Disambiguation1/5

Multiple tools appear to serve the same purpose, such as search_arxiv and search-arxiv, or papers-search-basic, paper-search-advanced, search_papers, and search. The download/read tools for different sources follow similar patterns, but some return 'not supported' messages, making it unclear which tools are actually functional.

Naming Consistency1/5

Tool names mix snake_case, kebab-case, and bare verbs without a consistent pattern. For example, about_nanci, analysis-citation-network, download-full-paper-arxiv, fetch, and search_arxiv all coexist, and the same action for different sources alternates conventions (search-arxiv vs search_arxiv).

Tool Count1/5

With 53 tools, the server is heavily over-scoped. Many tools are redundant or near-duplicates, such as six source-specific search tools plus an aggregate search, and the inclusion of both paper and clinical trial tools in one server creates unnecessary bloat.

Completeness3/5

The server covers a wide range of research workflows, including search, download, read, citations, authors, and clinical trials. However, several tools (crossref/pubmed download/read) are non-functional dead ends, and the redundancy makes it harder to navigate the surface.

Resources

Need Help?