Skip to main content
Glama
HasData

Google Scholar MCP Server

by HasData
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersScoreDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

google_scholar_scholar: GET /

hasdata_google_scholar_scholar_getScholarSearchResults

Search Google Scholar for academic articles using author/source operators, year ranges, cited-by and all-versions lookups, with pagination and filters for reviews, citations, and language.

Instructions

Get Scholar Search Results

Scrapes Google Scholar for a query with author:/source: search helpers, year range (asYlo/asYhi), cited-by and all-versions lookups (cites/cluster), review-article and citation-inclusion filters, language/language-restrict, and start/num pagination. Returns each organic result with title, link, snippet, publication info (authors with profile links), cited-by count and link, related-articles link, and all-versions count and link. Use for academic research, literature review automation, citation tracking, and grounding research agents with scholarly sources.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesSearch query. Supports Google Scholar search helpers such as `author:` and `source:`.
hlNoThe two-letter language code for the language you want to use for the search. Provide one exact documented value (159 allowed), e.g. `af`, `ak`.
lrNoThe 'lr' parameter specifies the language of the websites to return results from. This parameter filters results based on the language of the web content.
numNoMaximum number of results to return per page.
asRrNoSet to 1 to return review articles only, or 0 (default) to return all articles.
safeNoAdult content filtering option.
asSdtNoSearch type/filter, e.g. `0,5` for the default Articles filter, `4` for case law with court codes, or `0`/`7` for patents.
asVisNoSet to 1 to exclude citations from the results, or 0 (default) to include them.
asYhiNoReturn results published up to and including this year.
asYloNoReturn results published from this year onward.
citesNoUnique article ID to look up articles that cite it, as returned in a result's `citedBy.citesId`.
startNoResult offset for pagination, where 0 is the first result.
filterNoDefines whether to enable or disable the filters for 'Similar Results' and 'Omitted Results'. Set to 1 (default) to enable these filters, or 0 to disable them.
scisbdNoSort results by date instead of relevance: 1 for abstracts only, 2 for everything. Omit for relevance sorting.
clusterNoUnique article ID to look up all indexed versions of that article, as returned in a result's `versions.clusterId`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

The description states it 'scrapes Google Scholar' and 'returns' organic results, implying a read-only operation. However, there are no annotations and the description does not mention potential rate limits, blocking, authentication requirements, or the absence of side effects. It covers basic behavior but leaves some operational expectations implicit.

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 a single focused paragraph that front-loads the purpose and then lists key features and use cases. It is not overly verbose, though it somewhat duplicates parameter details already present in the schema. Overall it is concise and well-organized.

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?

The description compensates for the absence of an output schema by enumerating the result fields and linking them to parameter behavior. It includes enough context for an agent to understand expected outputs and typical applications. It lacks only explicit error/rate-limit handling, which is minor for a search GET endpoint.

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?

While the schema already describes all parameters (100% coverage), the prose description adds valuable context, such as examples for `asSdt` (e.g., '0,5' for Articles), the meaning of `scisbd` for date sorting, and how `cites`/`cluster` map to returned result fields. This goes beyond simple parameter names.

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 identifies the tool as scraping Google Scholar for search results, listing the key query capabilities (author/source helpers, year range, citation lookups) and the exact output fields (title, link, snippet, cited-by, versions). This differentiates it from sibling tools like the citation formatter.

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?

The description explicitly states recommended use cases ('academic research, literature review automation, citation tracking, and grounding research agents with scholarly sources'). It does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide 'when not to use' guidance, but the use cases are sufficiently specific to guide selection.

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