litreview-mcp

Follow citations

get_citations

Read-only

Follow a paper's citation trail via OpenAlex ID or DOI to find later citing works or its foundational references, with year filters and results sorted by citation count.

Instructions

Follow the citation trail from a paper, most cited first. Direction "cited_by" finds later papers that cite it, which shows how the idea developed. Direction "references" finds the papers it cites, which shows its foundations.

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": {
      "id": "<id>",
      "direction": "<direction>"
    },
    "name": "get_citations"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	OpenAlex ID (W2057673348) or DOI (10.1207/s15326985ep4102_4)
`limit`	No	How many papers to return
`direction`	Yes
`from_year`	No	Only papers published in or after this year

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Nov 9, 2026

TDQS

A3.5/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a genuine behavioral detail not in the annotations or schema: results come back 'most cited first', which tells the agent how to interpret ordering. It does not mention pagination limits, whether the trail can be exhausted, or error behavior for invalid IDs.

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?

Roughly forty words, front-loaded with the core action and then the mode semantics in parallel structure, with no filler. The trailing clause 'most cited first' is slightly awkwardly appended to the opening sentence, which keeps it just under ideal.

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?

With only four parameters, two of them required, and read-only annotations, the description covers enough to invoke the tool correctly. But there is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of saying what a result looks like, and it says only that papers are returned in citation order, without field or pagination detail.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 75% and the one undocumented parameter in the schema is 'direction', whose enum values the description fully disambiguates with concrete interpretations ('later papers that cite it' vs 'the papers it cites'). That is real added meaning beyond the schema, not a restatement of it.

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?

The description states a specific verb and resource ('Follow the citation trail from a paper'), so an agent immediately knows this traverses citations rather than retrieving or searching. It does not name or contrast itself with siblings like get_paper or search_papers, which keeps it short of a 5.

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 guidance is strong at the mode level: it explains exactly what 'cited_by' versus 'references' mean and what research question each answers. However, there is no guidance on when to choose this tool over search_papers or get_paper, and no stated prerequisite such as needing a valid OpenAlex ID or DOI.

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

Deploy Server