OpenReview MCP Server
Server Configuration
Describes the environment variables required to run the server.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| OPENREVIEW_BASEURL | Yes | The OpenReview API base URL (e.g., https://api2.openreview.net) | |
| OPENREVIEW_PASSWORD | Yes | Your OpenReview password | |
| OPENREVIEW_USERNAME | Yes | Your OpenReview email address |
Instructions
Guidance the server publishes about itself, which clients place ahead of the tool catalog so the model reads it before choosing anything.
This server publishes no instructions, or was last inspected before Glama recorded them.
Capabilities
Features and capabilities supported by this server
Protocol revision2025-11-25
| Capability | Details |
|---|---|
| tools | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| prompts | {
"listChanged": false
} |
| resources | {
"subscribe": false,
"listChanged": false
} |
| experimental | {} |
Tools
Functions exposed to the LLM to take actions
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
| list_venuesA | List all OpenReview venues where you have an active role (Reviewer, Area Chair, or Senior Area Chair). |
| list_assignmentsA | List papers assigned to you for a given venue. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier (e.g., 'ICLR.cc/2025/Conference'). Use list_venues to find this. role: Your role — 'reviewer', 'area_chair', or 'senior_area_chair'. Default: 'reviewer'. |
| get_submissionA | Get full details of a submission (title, abstract, authors, keywords, etc.). Args: venue_id: The venue identifier (e.g., 'ICLR.cc/2025/Conference'). submission_id: The submission's note ID. Provide this OR submission_number. submission_number: The submission's paper number. Provide this OR submission_id. |
| get_pdfA | Download a submission's PDF and return the file path so you can read it. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier (e.g., 'ICLR.cc/2025/Conference'). submission_id: The submission's note ID. Provide this OR submission_number. submission_number: The submission's paper number. Provide this OR submission_id. |
| get_reviewsA | Get all official reviews for a submission. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier (e.g., 'ICLR.cc/2025/Conference'). submission_id: The submission's note ID. Provide this OR submission_number. submission_number: The paper number. Provide this OR submission_id. |
| get_review_statusB | Check review completion status for all your assigned papers. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. role: Your role — 'reviewer', 'area_chair', or 'senior_area_chair'. Default: 'area_chair'. |
| submit_reviewA | Prepare a review for submission. Returns a preview — call confirm_submission to actually post it. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_number: The paper number. rating: Numerical rating (scale depends on venue). confidence: Your confidence level (scale depends on venue). review_text: The main review text. title: Review title. Default: 'Official Review'. strengths: Paper strengths (if venue uses separate fields). weaknesses: Paper weaknesses (if venue uses separate fields). questions: Questions for the authors. limitations: Limitations discussion. ethics_flag: Whether to flag ethics concerns. |
| edit_reviewA | Edit your existing review. Returns a preview — call confirm_submission to actually post the edit. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_number: The paper number. review_text: Updated review text. rating: Updated rating. confidence: Updated confidence. title: Updated title. strengths: Updated strengths. weaknesses: Updated weaknesses. questions: Updated questions. |
| submit_meta_reviewA | Prepare a meta-review for submission. Returns a preview — call confirm_submission to post it. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_number: The paper number. recommendation: Your recommendation (e.g., 'Accept', 'Reject', 'Accept (Poster)', etc.). metareview_text: The meta-review text summarizing reviews and your assessment. confidence: Your confidence level (scale depends on venue). |
| get_discussionA | Get all discussion comments on a submission (rebuttals, reviewer responses, AC comments). Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_id: The submission's note ID. Provide this OR submission_number. submission_number: The paper number. Provide this OR submission_id. |
| post_commentA | Post a comment on a submission. Returns a preview — call confirm_submission to post it. Default readers include ACs, SACs, and PCs. Override with the readers parameter. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_number: The paper number. comment_text: The comment text. readers: Who can see this comment. Defaults to ACs + SACs + PCs + Reviewers for the paper. |
| message_reviewerA | Send a private message to a specific reviewer. Visible to the reviewer, ACs, SACs, and PCs. Returns a preview — call confirm_submission to actually send it. Args: venue_id: The venue identifier. submission_number: The paper number. reviewer_id: The reviewer's anonymous ID (e.g., 'Reviewer_ABCD'). subject: Message subject line. message_text: Message body. |
| confirm_submissionA | Confirm and submit a pending review, meta-review, or comment to OpenReview. Args: confirmation_id: The confirmation ID returned by submit_review, submit_meta_review, post_comment, or message_reviewer. |
Prompts
Interactive templates invoked by user choice
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No prompts | |
Resources
Contextual data attached and managed by the client
| Name | Description |
|---|---|
No resources | |
TDQS
Scored across 13 tools
Each tool has a distinct purpose with clear boundaries: list_venues, list_assignments, get_submission, get_pdf, get_reviews, get_discussion, get_review_status, submit_review, submit_meta_review, edit_review, post_comment, message_reviewer, and confirm_submission. There is no overlap or ambiguity between tools; for example, get_reviews retrieves existing reviews while submit_review creates new ones, and confirm_submission is uniquely for finalizing pending actions.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun naming pattern (e.g., list_venues, get_submission, submit_review, post_comment). The verbs are descriptive and appropriate for their actions (list, get, submit, post, edit, message, confirm), and there are no deviations in style or convention across the 13 tools.
With 13 tools, this server is well-scoped for the OpenReview domain, covering key workflows like venue listing, assignment management, submission retrieval, review/meta-review creation and editing, commenting, messaging, and confirmation. Each tool serves a specific, necessary function without bloat, and the count aligns with typical MCP servers (3-15 tools).
The tool set provides comprehensive coverage for the OpenReview peer-review domain, including CRUD-like operations: listing venues and assignments, retrieving submissions and related data (PDFs, reviews, discussions), creating and editing reviews/meta-reviews/comments/messages, and confirming submissions. There are no obvious gaps; agents can perform full review workflows from start to finish without dead ends.