doc-tools-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to doc-tools-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- FlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceA local MCP server for evidence-safe academic citation workflows, including verified-reference retrieval, Zotero duplicate detection and import, and Word export via Pandoc with zotero.lua.1-
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceMCP server that connects to a local Zotero library, enabling search, citation generation with CSL styles, and automatic bibliography updates in Markdown documents.109 npmMIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityAmaintenanceAn MCP server that validates DOIs, formats citations, manages bibliography collections, and catches fabricated references, returning citation metadata only. It works with MCP clients over stdio and supports both basic and API-key-based usage.2MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceAn MCP server that gives any MCP-compatible assistant access to your Zotero reference library, enabling search, citation, bibliography generation, and .docx processing while keeping Zotero as the ground truth for references.91MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for verifying academic citations via Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, and CrossRef.1MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityCmaintenanceThis MCP server enables AI assistants like Claude to read and search your local Zotero bibliographic database directly from your machine.8MIT
TDQS
Scored across 14 tools
The bib:* and ctverify:* namespaces cleanly separate bibliography management from citation verification. Within each group, tools like get, search, exists, list, and stats have clearly distinct purposes, so an agent is unlikely to select the wrong one.
The namespace:action pattern is consistent and readable, with snake_case action names like bib:list and ctverify:bulk-update. The only minor deviations are noun-style actions such as bib:stats and ctverify:status, plus the hyphenated bulk-update.
Fourteen tools is well-scoped for a server covering bibliography management and citation verification. Each tool represents a distinct operation, and the split of 9 bibliography tools and 5 verification tools feels balanced without unnecessary bloat.
The bibliography side covers CRUD, search, validation, existence checks, and statistics, while the verification side covers extraction, status tracking, and batch updates. Minor gaps exist, such as no way to list all bibliography entries without specifying a CSL type and no delete operation for verification registry entries, but these are workable.