Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
zotero-rag

zotero-rag

by jolapodolszanska
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

get_item

Fetch the complete bibliographic record for a single Zotero item, covering authors, year, venue, DOI, tags, collections, and abstract.

Instructions

Full bibliographic record of one work: authors, year, venue, DOI, tags, collections, abstract.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "item_key": "<item_key>"
    },
    "name": "get_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
item_keyYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clarifies that the tool returns a full record with specific bibliographic fields, but it does not mention permissions, error behavior, or whether the operation is read-only.

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 a single, information-dense sentence that front-loads the return scope and field list. Every element contributes directly to understanding the tool's output.

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

Completeness3/5

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

An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return structure, and it appropriately summarizes the main fields. However, the undocumented item_key parameter and lack of usage guidance leave meaningful gaps for an agent invoking the tool.

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

Parameters2/5

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

The schema has 0% description coverage for item_key, and the description does not explain what an item_key is, its format, or how to obtain one. The phrase 'one work' only loosely implies the parameter identifies a work.

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 that the tool returns a full bibliographic record of one work and lists the fields included. This distinguishes it from listing/searching tools by emphasizing a single work, though it does not explicitly name or contrast siblings.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus search_library, list_items, or search_within_item. The implied use case is fetching details for a known item, but no alternatives or exclusions are stated.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools