litcheck-mcp
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| LITCHECK_LOG | No | Set LITCHECK_LOG to put the log elsewhere (for one project, say); --log does the same per call (verify-log takes the path as its argument). | |
| LITCHECK_CONTACT | No | Set LITCHECK_CONTACT to an address the services can reach you at. litcheck sends it only with each request: in the User-Agent, to every host it calls (the PMC bucket on Amazon S3 included), and as the email/mailto parameter NCBI, Europe PMC, Crossref and OpenAlex ask for. |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| check_quoteA | Check whether a quoted passage appears in the paper's pinned open-access PMC text. Also reports the text's version, sha256 and licence, and the paper's retraction status,
and appends an evidence line to the log. The text searched is PMC's whole plain-text file,
header and reference list included, so check |
| resolve_identifierA | Map one DOI, PMID or PMCID to the other two, through the PMC ID converter. The converter knows only articles in PubMed Central; a DOI it cannot map is also looked up in Europe PMC. NOT_FOUND means not in PMC (and, for a DOI, not in Europe PMC either): a PMID or PMCID is not looked up elsewhere, so NOT_FOUND does not mean the paper does not exist. UNVERIFIABLE means a service could not be read. |
| retraction_statusA | Is the paper retracted? Reads PMC's is_retracted flag and Crossref's notices. Retraction, withdrawal and removal notices count; corrections do not; an expression of
concern is reported separately. NOT_RETRACTED_AS_OF means no retraction notice was found
in the sources consulted, as of its date; it needs the identifier to have resolved and
every consulted source to have answered, otherwise the status is UNVERIFIABLE. A paper PMC
does not hold is checked on Crossref alone, and one with no known DOI on PMC's flag alone;
|
| search_literatureA | Run one literature search and record it, with its response hash, in the log. hit_count is what the engine reported (for litsense, the number of results it returned,
at most 100); items are the first |
| citing_papersB | List works that cite a paper, from OpenAlex, and record the search in the log. |
| verify_logA | Re-walk the log's hash chain and report the first line that does not fit, if any. This catches accidental and naive edits. The hashes are not keyed, so a rewrite that recomputes every later hash, or a cut-off tail, is caught only by comparing head_sha256 with a copy kept elsewhere. A log that does not exist yet reports chain_ok false. |
| record_supportB | Record a person's or a named judge's support verdict about an evidence line. litcheck computes no support verdict itself; this stores one that was given, with who gave it, as a new line in the log. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 7 tools
Each tool targets a clearly distinct task: quote checking, identifier mapping, log integrity, retraction status, literature search, citation listing, and support recording. Although retraction_status and check_quote both read PMC, their purposes (retraction notices vs. textual quote matching) are unambiguous from the descriptions.
Most tools follow a verb_noun pattern (check_quote, resolve_identifier, verify_log, search_literature, record_support). Two deviate into noun phrases (retraction_status, citing_papers), which is a minor inconsistency but still readable and predictable.
Seven tools is well-scoped for a literature-verification server, and each tool earns its place with a distinct role. No redundancy or filler tools.
The surface covers the core verification lifecycle: quote checking, ID resolution, retraction checking, searching, citations, and support recording plus log auditing. Minor gaps exist (e.g., no tool to fetch full paper metadata or export/report the log), but agents can work around them.