Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
arxiv-mcp

arxiv-mcp

by evangit2
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Remote

Get Paper

get_paper

Retrieve full metadata and abstract for a single arXiv paper by its ID, with no API key required. Use it to look up one paper's details quickly.

Instructions

Get full metadata + abstract for one arXiv ID (e.g. "1706.03762"). No API key needed.

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": {
      "arxiv_id": "<arxiv_id>"
    },
    "name": "get_paper"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
arxiv_idYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does add real context: it discloses the auth requirement ("No API key needed") and the payload shape (metadata plus abstract). It stops short of describing failure behavior for invalid or missing IDs, which is the one behavioral gap for a lookup tool.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Two short clauses, with the core operation front-loaded and the auth note as a secondary aside. No filler or redundant restatement of the title.

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?

For a single-parameter read tool with an output schema that documents the return shape, the description covers purpose, input format, and auth. The remaining gap is routing guidance against extract_paper and error semantics.

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 0%, so the bare schema only says "arxiv_id: string." The description compensates by establishing cardinality (exactly one) and providing a concrete example format ("1706.03762"), which is meaningfully more than the schema supplies.

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 ("Get full metadata + abstract") scoped to a single arXiv ID, which implicitly contrasts with a multi-result search. It does not explicitly name or differentiate from the sibling extract_paper, so an agent must infer the boundary between retrieving metadata and extracting content.

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 "one arXiv ID" and the example, so an agent can tell this is the single-record lookup path. However, there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over extract_paper or corpus_lookup, and no guidance on what happens when the ID is unknown.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools