inspirehep-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to inspirehep-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceAn MCP server for the INSPIRE-HEP API, enabling literature search, author lookups, DOI/arXiv/ORCID resolution, citation export, and bibliography generation with configurable detail levels.9MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceAn MCP server that integrates InspireHEP high-energy physics literature with LLMs. Search papers, explore citations, retrieve author metrics, and generate formatted references.97AGPL 3.0
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceMCP server providing tools for high-energy physics: literature search (INSPIRE-HEP, arXiv), data access (HEPData), and statistical analysis (pyhf likelihoods) for reinterpreting LHC searches.10Apache 2.0
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA MCP server for academic literature retrieval, aggregating multiple data sources like arXiv, Crossref, OpenAlex, PubMed, and Semantic Scholar to provide search, details, citations, trends, and recommendations.4MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA lightweight MCP server for querying arXiv with semantic and keyword search, supporting natural language queries and structured filters.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceComprehensive MCP server for academic research workflows, enabling paper searching across multiple sources, manuscript processing with citation placeholders, search caching, and citation export.11MIT
TDQS
Scored across 3 tools
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: searching by author, full text, or title. There is no overlap in functionality, and an agent can easily tell them apart based on the search parameter.
All tool names follow a consistent pattern: 'inspirehep_search_by_' followed by the search parameter (author, fulltext, title). This verb_noun structure is uniform and predictable throughout the set.
With only 3 tools, the server feels thin for a literature search domain. While the tools cover basic search methods, the scope is limited, and more operations (e.g., filtering, sorting, or retrieving specific records) might be expected for a comprehensive search interface.
The tool surface is severely incomplete for a literature search server. It only offers search functionality without any way to retrieve, update, or manage records (e.g., get_by_id, list_results, or advanced filtering). This creates significant gaps that could lead to agent failures when trying to perform full workflows.