Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
zotero-rag

zotero-rag

by jolapodolszanska
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

search_within_item

Search the full text of a single Zotero item using its item_key and a query to find relevant passages without searching the entire library. Use it after retrieving an item key to narrow results.

Instructions

Search inside one work only (item_key from search results or list_items).

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>",
      "query": "<query>"
    },
    "name": "search_within_item"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo
queryYes
item_keyYes

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but the description does not explicitly confirm safety, mention auth needs, rate limits, index freshness, or other operational traits.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The scoping constraint and parameter source are both stated efficiently.

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

Completeness2/5

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

The tool has three parameters at 0% schema description coverage and no annotations. Although an output schema exists and the required parameters are fairly obvious, the description does not explain limit semantics or what kind of search is performed within the item.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate. It explains only that item_key comes from search results or list_items; it says nothing about the meaning of query or the limit parameter's purpose beyond the schema default.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Search inside one work only.' The phrase 'one work only' implicitly contrasts with the sibling search_library, though it does not name the alternative explicitly.

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?

Provides a useful prerequisite by saying item_key comes from 'search results or list_items,' which implies this tool is used after locating an item. It does not explicitly state when to prefer search_library or get_item instead.

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