Skip to main content
Glama
ScienceLiveHub

Replication Radar

by ScienceLiveHub
OverviewSchemaRelated ServersScoreDiscussions
JavaScript
Remote

replication_status

Retrieve replication status for a DOI. Returns independent verdicts, agreement patterns, replicated claims, and the paper's title and abstract.

Instructions

Has this DOI been independently replicated, and did it hold? Returns every Science Live verdict — pulled LIVE from the nanopub network, any signer (author-agnostic) — with the validation status, CiTO relation, the replication's repository, and links to the signed Outcome/CiTO nanopubs. 'open' if not replicated. This is the reliability signal the OpenAIRE Graph structurally cannot hold.

Also returns:

  • agreement: how the independent verdicts agree — pattern is one of robustly_validated / validated / contested / refuted, with confirm/partial/ contradicted counts (so you can say how robustly it held, not just that it did).

  • claims: the exact FORRT claim(s) that were replicated — each an atomic AIDA statement plus its claim type (descriptive pattern, statistical significance, …).

  • the paper's title and abstract (from OpenAIRE, markup stripped), so you can read it or extract/compare the atomic claim yourself.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
doiYes

Tool Definition Quality

A3.9/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden and excels by detailing live data retrieval, author-agnostic signers, returned fields (validation status, CiTO relation, repository, links, agreement pattern, claims, title/abstract), and behavior for unreplicated DOIs ('open').

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is detailed and somewhat verbose, but effectively structured with clear bullet points outlining return values. It could be more concise, but the length is justified by the breadth of information.

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 no output schema and one undocumented parameter, the description compensates by thoroughly explaining return values, data source, and behavior (e.g., 'open' for unreplicated). It is nearly complete for an agent to understand the tool's functionality.

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?

The sole parameter 'doi' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not explain its format or meaning beyond the name. The context implies it's a DOI string, but explicit guidance is missing.

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 purpose: to check if a DOI has been independently replicated and whether it held. It specifies the data source (Science Live verdicts from nanopub network) and distinguishes it from other systems like OpenAIRE Graph.

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?

The description implies usage for obtaining replication status but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus siblings (find_independent_software, radar, verified_claims). No when-not-to-use or alternative guidance is provided.

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

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/ScienceLiveHub/replication-radar'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server