Skip to main content
Glama
imnotdev25

paper-mcp

by imnotdev25

Resolve DOI to Full Paper Metadata

doi_get_metadata
Read-onlyIdempotent

Resolve a DOI to comprehensive paper metadata by querying Crossref, Semantic Scholar, and Unpaywall in parallel. Returns bibliographic details, citations, open-access status, and more.

Instructions

Resolve a DOI to comprehensive paper metadata from multiple authoritative sources.

This is the reverse of paper_get_metadata: given a DOI you already know, retrieve everything about the paper without needing its title.

Data is merged from three complementary sources (all queried in parallel):

  1. Crossref — canonical DOI registry; best for bibliographic data, publisher, volume/issue/page, funders, license.

  2. Semantic Scholar — adds citation count, references, fields of study, TL;DR, and open-access PDF link.

  3. Unpaywall — adds detailed open-access status and every known PDF URL.

Returns a merged JSON object with: doi, title, abstract, authors, year, publication_date, venue, publisher, volume, issue, page, type, subjects, issn, funders, license, citation_count, reference_count, is_referenced_by_count, fields_of_study, tldr, publication_types, is_open_access, oa_status, open_access_pdf, oa_locations (list of all known PDF URLs with host_type / version / license), arxiv_id, semantic_scholar_id, sources (list of which APIs responded successfully)

Args: params (DoiInput): { doi: str } Accepts bare DOI or full URL, e.g.: "10.1145/3442188.3445922" "https://doi.org/10.1145/3442188.3445922"

Returns: str: JSON-encoded metadata dict or { "error": "..." }.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paramsYesInput model for DOI-based lookups.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, covering safety. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: it queries three sources in parallel (Crossref, Semantic Scholar, Unpaywall) and merges results. It also describes the output fields and error format, going beyond annotations.

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?

The description is somewhat long but well-structured with bullet points for sources and a clear list of returned fields. Each part adds value for a complex tool. Could be slightly more concise, but the structure helps readability.

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?

Given the complexity (multiple data sources, merged output), the description is thorough. It explains the parameter format, the sources queried, the full list of output fields, and error handling. With annotations covering safety and output schema existing, it is completely adequate.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% with doi parameter already documented in schema. The description repeats the accepted formats (bare DOI or URL) but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Resolve a DOI to comprehensive paper metadata' and explicitly differentiates from sibling tool paper_get_metadata by stating 'This is the reverse of paper_get_metadata'. It specifies the verb (resolve), resource (DOI to metadata), and scope (multiple sources).

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains that this tool is for when you already know the DOI, and that it is the reverse of paper_get_metadata (which likely uses title). It implicitly guides when to use this vs. siblings, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternative tools for different scenarios.

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/imnotdev25/paper-search-mcp'

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