zotero-library-mcp

Create Collection

create_collection

Create a new Zotero collection, optionally nested under a parent collection, to organize papers, books, and references in your library.

Instructions

Create a new collection in your Zotero library.

Args: name: Name for the new collection parent_collection_id: Optional parent collection key to nest under

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

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

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`name`	Yes
`library_id`	No
`library_type`	No
`parent_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

C2.9/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the agent knows this is a non-destructive local write. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that – nothing about duplicate-name handling, whether parent_collection_id must reference an existing key, or permission requirements – but the annotation coverage keeps this at a baseline 3.

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?

One front-loaded sentence stating the action, followed by a compact Args block. It is appropriately sized with no filler, though the Args block partly restates schema titles rather than adding new meaning.

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

Completeness2/5

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 with 4 parameters at 0% schema coverage and two parameters undocumented anywhere, plus no guidance on nesting validity or duplicate names, the definition is not complete enough for confident invocation.

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 2 of 4 parameters (name, parent_collection_id) and silently omits library_id and library_type. Since library_type accepts 'user'/'group' and library_id selects the target library, the omission is a real gap for a multi-library tool.

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 and resource ('Create a new collection in your Zotero library'), which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like add_to_collection, rename_collection, and delete_collection. However, it does not explicitly name or contrast with any sibling, leaving the routing inference to the agent.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. It doesn't clarify how this differs from add_to_collection (adding items to an existing collection) or whether a collection must be created before items can be added, which is exactly the ambiguity an agent faces here.

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