No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 18 tools
Each tool targets a distinct entity (member, journal, funder, type, license, prefix, work). The only confusion is get_work_quality, which sounds like a quality metric but actually queries a DOI's registration agency; the description clarifies, but the name could mislead.
Most tools follow a clear verb_noun pattern (search_*, get_*, list_*), with consistent entity-specific suffixes like '_works'. The outlier is get_work_quality, which uses a non-entity noun and doesn't reflect its purpose; ping is also non-standard but acceptable.
At 18 tools, this is slightly above the ideal 3-15 range, but the broad scope of Crossref's API—covering multiple entity types plus complex work search—justifies the count. No tool feels redundant or extraneous.
The set covers search and retrieval for members, journals, funders, works, types, licenses, and prefixes, including references. However, there is no endpoint for works citing a given DOI (forward citations), which is a notable gap for a scholarly metadata server.