Skip to main content
Glama

jp_lit_search_guides_cases

Search reference cases from a collaborative database to find similar inquiries, answer processes, and reference materials for advancing research.

Instructions

レファレンス協同データベースのレファレンス事例を検索する。類似質問、回答プロセス、参考資料を調査の次の一手の材料として参照するためのツール

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYesレファレンス協同データベースから探す調べ方・事例の検索語。
limitNo返す事例・マニュアルの最大件数。最大 20。
pageNo検索結果ページ番号。1 始まり。
lib_idNo特定図書館の CRD library ID に絞る場合に指定する。
lib_groupNo公共図書館、大学図書館、専門図書館などの館種で絞る。
force_refreshNotrue の場合はローカル cache を使わず upstream API から再取得する。false の場合は保存済み cache を優先する。

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryYes
typeYes
pageYes
limitYes
totalYes
itemsYes
rawYes
cacheNo
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only describes a search operation (implying read-only) but fails to mention any side effects, authentication needs, rate limits, or caching behavior beyond the force_refresh parameter. The description adds minimal behavioral context.

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 extremely concise with two short sentences in Japanese, front-loaded with the main action. No extraneous words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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?

Given the output schema exists and the tool has 6 parameters, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose and domain. However, it could provide more context about the relationship to sibling tools or typical use cases to be fully complete.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond the schema's parameter descriptions; it only provides general context about the database and purpose.

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 clearly states it searches for reference cases in the Reference Cooperative Database and explains the purpose (finding similar questions, answer processes, reference materials). However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like jp_lit_search or jp_lit_search_guides_manuals, lacking differentiation.

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?

The description implies usage for research next steps by referencing similar questions and materials, but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor mentions alternatives among the many sibling search tools.

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/itarunnn/jp-lit-mcp'

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