InspireHEP MCP Server

Get Paper Details

get_paper_details

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve complete metadata for any physics paper using its Inspire ID, arXiv ID, or DOI. Get title, authors, abstract, citations, and publication details in one call.

Instructions

Retrieve detailed metadata for a specific paper.

Provide at least one identifier. Accepts multiple formats:

inspire_id: "3456"
arxiv_id: "arxiv:2301.12345", "arxiv:hep-ph/0123456", or full URL
doi: "10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.456789" or full URL

Returns title, authors, abstract, citations, references count, publication info, keywords, URLs, and more.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`doi`	No
`arxiv_id`	No
`inspire_id`	No

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv0.3.0Sep 8, 2026

addedOutput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +true
```

removedOutput schema / properties

Removed value: -{
-  "result": {
-    "title": "Result",
-    "type": "string"
-  }
-}

removedOutput schema / required
```
Removed value: -[
-  "result"
-]
```

changedOutput schema / title

Previous value: -"get_paper_detailsOutput"New value: +"get_paper_detailsDictOutput"

First observedv0.1.4Jun 11, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations already disclose the safe, non-mutating nature, and the description adds what data is returned (title, authors, abstract, citations, references count, publication info, keywords, URLs). It does not describe error behavior or rate limits, but annotations cover the key behavioral safety aspects.

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 and concise, using a short introductory sentence, a clear bulleted list of identifier formats, and a brief enumeration of return fields. It avoids unnecessary jargon or redundant details while remaining informative.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the description lists key return fields, the core usage context is complete. It could mention behavior when multiple identifiers are provided or when no identifier resolves, but for a metadata retrieval tool with clear identifier requirements, it is adequately complete.

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?

Despite the schema having no descriptions, the description fully explains each parameter's expected format: inspire_id, arxiv_id (including variations and URLs), and doi (including full URLs). It also conveys the 'at least one' constraint, which is meaningful context beyond the optional schema fields.

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 verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('detailed metadata for a specific paper'), making the primary purpose unmistakable. It also differentiates itself from siblings like search_papers by focusing on a single paper via identifiers.

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 instructs to 'provide at least one identifier' and details the accepted formats for each parameter. It does not name sibling alternatives or conditions for choosing this tool over them, but the identifier-focused usage is clear and actionable.

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

Deploy Server