zotero-claude-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

zotero_libraries

List all accessible Zotero libraries, including local libraries on this machine and group libraries on zotero.org, to identify available sources for searching and citing.

Instructions

List available libraries: local libraries on this machine and group libraries on zotero.org.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "zotero_libraries"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Sep 23, 2026

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 carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. 'List' clearly signals a read-only operation, and the mention of both local and zotero.org group libraries adds useful behavioral context. It does not explicitly state authentication or network requirements, but these are largely implied by the remote scope.

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 one efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and immediately clarifies scope, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter listing tool, the description is largely sufficient: it states the action and the two scopes. There is no output schema, so a brief note about the returned shape (e.g., library names/IDs) would have made it fully complete, but the omission is minor for such a simple tool.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the description has nothing to document. Per the baseline for parameterless tools, this is appropriate and complete.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('available libraries'), and it specifies the two scopes: local libraries and group libraries on zotero.org. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on collections, tags, or items.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The use case is implied: the agent should call this when it needs to enumerate libraries the user has access to. However, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer this over related list-style tools, nor does it mention any prerequisites such as being signed in to zotero.org for group libraries.

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