scholar-mcp
Related Servers
Alternatives to scholar-mcp
No user-submitted related servers found.
Related Servers
- AlicenseAqualityAmaintenanceMCP server for scientific grounding: search and discover open-access research papers across arXiv, OpenAlex, Crossref, PubMed, and Semantic Scholar, and retrieve references/citations from paywalled journals via public DOI/abstract metadata.3225 PyPI5MIT
- AlicenseAqualityCmaintenanceUnified MCP server for scientific literature search and extraction, integrating databases like Scopus, OpenAlex, Semantic Scholar, and Unpaywall to enable AI agents to discover papers, track citations, and analyze content.27MIT
- AlicenseAqualityDmaintenanceMCP server enabling AI agents to search and retrieve scientific papers, citations, and author profiles from Crossref, OpenAlex, and Semantic Scholar with no API keys required.53MIT
- AlicenseAqualityBmaintenanceA unified MCP server for academic paper discovery, citation exploration, and research intelligence workflows over multiple scientific knowledge sources.71MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceMCP server for AI-assisted research: paper ingestion, semantic search, citation graph traversal, cross-domain knowledge synthesis, and workflow automation.MIT
- AlicenseNot gradedqualityDmaintenanceA MCP server for academic literature retrieval, aggregating multiple data sources like arXiv, Crossref, OpenAlex, PubMed, and Semantic Scholar to provide search, details, citations, trends, and recommendations.4MIT
TDQS
Scored across 21 tools
Most tools have distinct purposes, but get_paper, get_citations, get_references, get_citation_graph, and find_bridge_papers all relate to paper retrieval and could be confused. Descriptions clarify the differences, but an agent might misselect.
All tool names follow a consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., get_paper, search_books, generate_citations), with no deviations.
21 tools is on the high side for a scholarly server, though many are necessary for diverse upstreams and background job handling. It's borderline heavy but not unreasonable.
Covers paper, author, citation, book, and standards domains with CRUD-like operations and background job management. Minor gaps like no update or delete operations for records, but those aren't typical for read-focused scholarly APIs.