zotero-library-mcp

Add Paper By Arxiv Id

add_paper_by_arxiv_id

Add a paper to your Zotero library using its arXiv ID; fetch arXiv metadata, enrich via CrossRef if a DOI exists, and optionally add it to a collection.

Instructions

Add a paper to your Zotero library by its arXiv ID.

Fetches metadata from the arXiv API. If the paper has a DOI, resolves it via CrossRef for richer metadata; otherwise creates a preprint entry directly. Optionally add it to a specific collection.

Args: arxiv_id: The arXiv ID of the paper (e.g. "2301.07041") collection_id: Optional Zotero collection key to add the paper to

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`arxiv_id`	Yes
`library_id`	No
`library_type`	No
`collection_id`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed2 schema fields changedv0.10.0Sep 14, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / library_id

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Library Id"
+}

addedInput schema / properties / library_type

Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "enum": [
+        "user",
+        "group"
+      ],
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Library Type"
+}

First observedv0.9.0Aug 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Goes beyond the annotations by disclosing the external service chain: it fetches from the arXiv API and conditionally resolves via CrossRef, which explains the openWorldHint and the branching behavior (DOI present → richer metadata; absent → preprint entry). It does not mention auth requirements or failure modes, and the output schema covers the return, so a 4 is fair.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, then the behavior, then the optional collection. The Args block largely restates schema fields, which is slightly redundant, but the overall text is tight and earns its space.

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

Completeness3/5

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

The mutation behavior and external-fetch chain are covered, and the output schema handles return values. However, for a 4-parameter write tool with 0% schema coverage, the untouched library_id/library_type fields and the absence of scoping context leave meaningful gaps.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden, yet it documents only arxiv_id (with an example) and collection_id. The library_id and library_type parameters are never mentioned, leaving half the inputs undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a paper to your Zotero library by its arXiv ID') and the identifier type immediately distinguishes it from the sibling add_paper_by_doi. An agent can select this over the DOI/ISBN/metadata variants without opening any schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the arxiv_id requirement and the optional collection note, but the description never explicitly states when to prefer this over add_paper_by_doi or add_item_from_metadata, nor any exclusions. Implied rather than stated guidance.

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