Skip to main content
Glama

Set source

set_source
Destructive

Add a source to a project's register, or change one — its key, authors, title, year, venue, identifiers or PDF — or say how far it is checked. A source is named by 'id', or by 'project' and 'key': one that does not exist yet is created (with 'title'), unchecked. A field left out keeps its value and an empty one clears it; 'authors' given replaces the whole list. Identifiers are kept in one shape whatever they are pasted as (arXiv without 'arXiv:' and with its version, a DOI without https://doi.org/, 'MR' and digits, zbMATH without 'Zbl', an ISBN's digits with its checksum held), and each is once per project — a second source with the same one is refused, naming the first. 'check' moves the check by hand, with a line in its journal: 'manual' (you checked it against the original — say against what in 'reason'), 'mismatch' (it disagrees with what it names — 'reason' says how; required) or 'unchecked'; 'api' is written only by the check against the services. Changing the authors, title, year, venue or an identifier of a checked source takes it back to unchecked: what was checked is no longer there. Members of the project who may write only.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idNoThe source to change, as list_sources returned it. Or name it by 'project' and 'key'.
mrNoThe Mathematical Reviews number, e.g. 'MR1234567'.
doiNoThe DOI, e.g. '10.4007/annals.2024.199.1.3'.
keyNoThe source's key, e.g. 'IMP26' — a letter or digit, then letters, digits and ':', '.', '_', '-', '+'; once per project, case aside.
isbnNoThe ISBN, ten or thirteen digits.
yearNoThe year it appeared; 0 clears it.
arxivNoThe arXiv id, with its version where it matters: '2301.01234v3', 'math/0601001'.
checkNoHow far it is checked, by hand: 'manual', 'mismatch' or 'unchecked'.
titleNoIts title.
venueNoThe journal, series or publisher, e.g. 'Ann. of Math.'.
newKeyNoA new key for an existing source.
reasonNoWith 'check': against what it was checked, or how it disagrees — at most 1000 characters.
zbmathNoThe zbMATH number, e.g. '1234.56789'.
authorsNoIts authors in the work's order, as a JSON array replacing the list: [{"name":"N. D. Gupta"},{"name":"S. Sidki","person":42}] — 'name' as the work prints it, 'person' a person of the project's register you may see (find_person), optional. A person without a name takes the name the register shows.
projectNoThe project key, e.g. MATH.
pdfAttachmentNoIts PDF: the id of an issue's attachment you may open; 0 takes the PDF off.
pdfWikiAttachmentNoIts PDF: the id of a wiki page's attachment you may open; 0 takes the PDF off.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Added

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important mutation behavior: omitted fields keep values, empty fields clear them, authors replace the whole list, identifiers are normalized and unique per project, and changing checked bibliographic data reverts the check to unchecked. It also states the permission boundary and the refusal behavior for duplicate identifiers.

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?

It is dense but front-loaded, beginning with the main action and then covering creation, field semantics, identifiers, check state, and permissions. Despite its length, every sentence carries necessary behavioral or parameter information for a complex 17-parameter mutation tool.

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 complex write tool with rich annotations and a fully described schema, the description covers creation, update, field clearing/replacement, uniqueness constraints, check-state transitions, and authorization. No output schema exists, but the description is complete enough for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is already 100%, but the description adds significant cross-parameter meaning, including create-vs-update identification, empty-field clearing, full replacement of authors, identifier normalization rules, and check/reason interactions. It does not fully clarify every parameter, such as newKey versus key or the two PDF attachment variants, but it adds substantial value beyond the schema.

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 states a precise verb and resource: add or change a source in a project's register, including fields and check status. This clearly distinguishes it from read-only siblings like get_source/list_sources and destructive delete_source.

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 explains the creation path when no matching source exists and how a source is identified by 'id' or 'project' plus 'key'. It gives clear usage context but does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources