Skip to main content
Glama
openags

Paper Search MCP

by openags

read_openaire_paper

Extract text content from OpenAIRE research papers by providing a paper identifier. Downloads PDFs to a specified directory and returns the extracted text for analysis.

Instructions

Attempt to read and extract text content from an OpenAIRE paper.

Args: paper_id: OpenAIRE paper identifier. save_path: Directory where the PDF is/will be saved (default: './downloads'). Returns: str: Extracted text or error message.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
paper_idYes
save_pathNo./downloads

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • This is the MCP tool handler for 'read_openaire_paper'. It delegates the call to the OpenAiresearcher instance.
    async def read_openaire_paper(paper_id: str, save_path: str = "./downloads") -> str:
        """Attempt to read and extract text content from an OpenAIRE paper.
    
        Args:
            paper_id: OpenAIRE paper identifier.
            save_path: Directory where the PDF is/will be saved (default: './downloads').
        Returns:
            str: Extracted text or error message.
        """
        return openaire_searcher.read_paper(paper_id, save_path)
  • This is the implementation of 'read_paper' within the OpenAiresearcher class, which currently raises a NotImplementedError, indicating it is not yet supported for OpenAIRE.
    def read_paper(self, paper_id: str, save_path: str = "./downloads") -> str:
        """
        Download and extract text from an OpenAIRE paper.
    
        Args:
            paper_id: OpenAIRE paper identifier
            save_path: Directory where PDF is/will be saved
    
        Returns:
            Extracted text content of the paper
    
        Raises:
            NotImplementedError: If paper reading is not supported
        """
        raise NotImplementedError(
            f"{self.__class__.__name__} does not support direct paper reading."
        )
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 burden. It mentions 'Attempt to read and extract,' hinting at potential failure, and notes a default save path, but doesn't disclose critical behaviors like error conditions, permissions needed, rate limits, or what happens if the paper isn't accessible. For a tool that downloads and processes files, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and well-structured: a clear purpose statement followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence adds value, with no wasted words. It could be slightly improved by integrating usage context, but it's efficiently presented.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (involving download and text extraction), lack of annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is moderately complete. It covers purpose and parameters briefly, and an output schema exists (returns a string), so return values don't need explanation. However, it misses behavioral details like error handling or performance constraints, making it adequate but with clear gaps.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the schema provides no parameter details. The description adds minimal semantics: it explains 'paper_id' as an 'OpenAIRE paper identifier' and 'save_path' as a 'Directory where the PDF is/will be saved' with a default. However, it doesn't clarify format expectations (e.g., ID structure, path validity) or usage nuances, leaving parameters partially documented but insufficient for full understanding.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Attempt to read and extract text content from an OpenAIRE paper.' It specifies the verb ('read and extract'), resource ('OpenAIRE paper'), and outcome ('text content'). However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'read_arxiv_paper' or 'download_openaire', which handle similar operations for different sources.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With many sibling tools like 'download_openaire' and other 'read_*_paper' tools, there's no indication of prerequisites, when this tool is preferred, or what distinguishes it from similar tools. The only implied usage is for OpenAIRE papers, but no further context is given.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/openags/paper-search-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server