Skip to main content
Glama
paulet4a-commits

WebDataTools Developer, app & research data MCP server

by paulet4a-commits
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript

crossref_doi_lookup

Resolve DOIs, DOI URLs, or citations into title, authors, journal, citation count, and license using Crossref. Search free text when no DOI is given.

Instructions

CrossRef DOI & Citation Metadata Lookup resolves DOIs, DOI URLs or citations via the CrossRef API and returns title, authors, journal, citation count, abstract and license — one row per item. Billed to your own Apify account: ~$0.001 per result (Apify free-plan price, lower on paid plans).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemsYesDOIs, DOI URLs or citations — Enter one item per line: a bare DOI (10.1038/nature12373), a DOI URL (https://doi.org/10.1145/3292500.3330919), or free text to search — prefix free text with "search:" (search:Attention is all you need) or just paste a title/citation and it is searched automatically when it does not look like a DOI. Example: ["10.1038/nature12373"].
mailtoNoContact e-mail (polite pool) — Optional. Enter your e-mail, e.g. you@example.com, to be added to the User-Agent and as a mailto= query param so CrossRef routes your requests to its faster "polite pool". Leave empty to use the public pool.
searchRowsNoSearch results per query — Enter how many candidate works CrossRef should return for each free-text search item, e.g. 3. Only the best match (highest score) becomes the row; a higher number only improves matching, it does not create extra rows. Max 20.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the billing model (~$0.001 per result, charged to the caller's Apify account) and the output shape ('one row per item'), but says nothing about rate limits, failure behavior, or whether results are deduplicated/ranked.

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?

Two tight sentences: purpose and return fields first, then cost. No filler, and the most decision-relevant facts (what it does, what it costs) are front-loaded.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields, and it adds cost transparency. For a three-parameter lookup tool with 100% schema coverage this is nearly complete, though error/pagination behavior remains unaddressed.

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 100%, so the schema already documents items, mailto, and searchRows thoroughly. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 correct.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('resolves DOIs, DOI URLs or citations via the CrossRef API') and enumerates the returned fields (title, authors, journal, citation count, abstract, license). It is unmistakably distinct from all siblings, which cover unrelated domains (package health, GitHub, app stores).

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?

Usage is implied by the input description ('Enter one item per line... prefix free text with search:'), but the top-level description gives no when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternatives. A reader must infer the context from the schema.

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