Skip to main content
Glama

move_item_to_different_library

Destructive

Move a Zotero item to a different library by recreating it under a new key and deleting the original, breaking any citations that reference the original key.

Instructions

DESTRUCTIVE -- moves an item to a different Zotero library (e.g. from this user library into a group library, or vice versa). Zotero has no native cross-library move: this recreates the item in the target library under a BRAND-NEW key, then deletes the original.

Any Word citation referencing the original key is broken by this, exactly like delete_item_permanently -- silently and permanently. If the goal is just reorganizing within THIS library, use add_to_collection/remove_from_collection instead -- those preserve the key and citations keep working.

target_library_id/target_library_type: the destination library; the configured ZOTERO_API_KEY must have write access to it. version: the item's current version in the source library (from search_items/get_item) -- refused if stale. idempotency_key: strongly recommended for this tool specifically. If the create-in-target step succeeds but the delete-from-source step then fails, this operation ends up erroring while the item now exists in BOTH libraries -- a bare retry would redo the whole thing and create a SECOND duplicate in the target library, since the source item's version hasn't changed. Passing the same idempotency_key on retry replays the original failure (and its "clean up manually" guidance) instead of touching Zotero again. Also protects the normal success path the same way delete_item_permanently's does.

Returns old_key and new_key -- report both to the caller so anyone relying on the old key knows it changed.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYes
versionYes
idempotency_keyNo
target_library_idYes
target_library_typeYes
Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explaining the recreate-then-delete mechanism, brand-new key, silently broken Word citations, partial-failure risk, and idempotency replay semantics. This gives the agent critical understanding of consequences.

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?

The description is long but information-dense; every sentence earns its place, covering semantics, alternatives, failure modes, and retry guidance. It is front-loaded with DESTRUCTIVE and structured to first convey the core operation, then caveats, then parameter details.

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

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite no output schema, the description specifies return values (old_key and new_key) and instructs reporting both to the caller. It also covers auth, versioning, idempotency, and cleanup guidance, making it complete for a complex, destructive tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning for target_library_id/type, version, and idempotency_key, including auth requirements and stale-version refusal. The 'key' parameter is not explicitly described, though its role is strongly implied by the tool name and return values, so a small gap remains.

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 moves an item to a different Zotero library, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly contrasting with add_to_collection/remove_from_collection for within-library reorganization.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides explicit when-to-use: moving between libraries, and when-not-to-use: 'If the goal is just reorganizing within THIS library, use add_to_collection/remove_from_collection instead'. Also specifies prerequisites like write access and version freshness.

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/herbertkokholm/cite-caddy'

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