zotero-library-mcp

Add To Collection

add_to_collection

Add an existing Zotero item to a chosen collection by supplying the item key and target collection ID.

Instructions

Add an existing Zotero item to a collection.

Args: item_key: The Zotero item key (from search results) collection_id: The collection key to add it to

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

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

Output Schema

TableJSON 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

B3.2/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already carry the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=false), so the bar is lower. The description adds the useful constraint that the item must already exist, but does not disclose idempotency, duplicate handling, or error behavior for invalid keys.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in a single clear sentence, and the Args block is compact. Slightly redundant formatting for a short definition, but no wasted prose.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. But for a 4-parameter mutation tool, the description omits the two library-scoping params and any mention of failure modes, leaving material gaps.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents the two required params with helpful context ("from search results", "collection key") but leaves the optional library_id and library_type entirely undocumented in both schema and description.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ("Add an existing Zotero item to a collection"), which is clearly distinguishable from the sibling remove_from_collection. However, it does not explicitly name or differentiate itself from siblings beyond the obvious add/remove polarity.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

The description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives, aside from the parenthetical "(from search results)" on item_key. It never says what to do if the item is already in the collection, nor points to remove_from_collection.

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