Skip to main content
Glama
54yyyu
by 54yyyu

zotero_get_item_fulltext

Retrieve the full extracted text of a Zotero item's PDF or EPUB attachment to read the entire paper. Use when you need to read a specific paper, not for search or metadata.

Instructions

Return the full extracted text of a Zotero item's primary attachment (PDF or EPUB). WARNING: returns the entire paper (often 10K+ tokens). Use ONLY when the user explicitly wants to READ the paper — not for searching or browsing. For topic search use zotero_semantic_search; for metadata only use zotero_get_item_metadata. Avoid calling this on multiple papers in one conversation unless the user specifically asked to read several. item_key: 8-character Zotero item key. Normally the parent item — the tool locates the attached PDF/EPUB itself, preferring PDF unless attachment_priority says otherwise. Passing an attachment's own key instead reads exactly that file and skips the priority order, which is how you read one specific attachment of an item that has several (find keys via zotero_get_item_children). Scope: active library only. Extraction path (in order): local Zotero storage via SQLite when running in local mode (fastest, respects pdf_max_pages config); Zotero's server-side fulltext index; direct download and parsing as a last resort. Image-only scanned PDFs without OCR may return little or no text. Example: zotero_get_item_fulltext(item_key='RTKZQI8E').

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_keyYesZotero item key/ID. Normally the parent item, whose best attachment is chosen by ``attachment_priority``. Passing an *attachment's* own key is also supported and reads exactly that file, bypassing the priority order — pair it with ``zotero_get_item_children`` to read one specific attachment of an item that has several (#378).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It thoroughly discloses: the large token output (10K+ tokens), the extraction path fallback chain (SQLite → server fulltext index → direct download), the attachment_priority behavior, scope (active library only), and the limitation that image-only scanned PDFs without OCR may return little text. This is comprehensive behavioral disclosure.

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 dense but front-loaded with the most critical info (purpose + token warning). The structure flows logically: purpose, warning, alternatives, parameters, scope, extraction path, caveat, example. Slightly long but every sentence earns its place given the complexity of this tool (attachment resolution, fallback paths).

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 tool with no annotations but an output schema, the description covers all critical operational aspects: token size, when to use, alternative tools, attachment resolution logic, extraction fallback chain, OCR limitation, and an example. The output schema handles return-value documentation. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 schema description is already rich (explains parent vs attachment key, attachment priority, pairing with get_item_children). The description adds some value by restating the attachment-priority preference and providing an example, but largely echoes the schema's parameter documentation. Baseline 3 is appropriate since 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?

The description opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Return the full extracted text of a Zotero item's primary attachment (PDF or EPUB).' It clearly distinguishes this from siblings like zotero_semantic_search and zotero_get_item_metadata, and even warns this is for READING, not searching or browsing. Purpose is 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?

Excellent usage guidance: explicitly says use ONLY when user wants to READ the paper, explicitly excludes searching/browsing, names alternative tools (zotero_semantic_search, zotero_get_item_metadata) and explicitly warns against calling on multiple papers unless requested. This is exemplary usage guidance with clear when/when-not and named alternatives.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/54yyyu/zotero-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server