Skip to main content
Glama
reetp14

OpenAlex MCP Server

by reetp14

search_publishers

Find scholarly publishers in OpenAlex using full-text search, filters, and sorting to identify academic publishing sources for research.

Instructions

Search publishers

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
searchNoFull-text search query
filterNoKey:value OpenAlex filters. Supports entity attributes (e.g., 'country_codes', 'hierarchy_level'), IDs, and convenience filters (e.g., 'display_name.search'). Example: 'country_codes:US,hierarchy_level:0'
sortNoSort field with optional :desc
pageNoPage number
per_pageNoResults per page (max 200)
cursorNoCursor for deep pagination
group_byNoGroup results by field
selectNoFields to return
sampleNoRandom sample size
seedNoRandom seed
mailtoNoEmail for rate limits
api_keyNoPremium API key

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that executes the 'search_publishers' tool by making an OpenAlex API request to the /publishers endpoint and formatting the JSON response as MCP content.
    export async function searchPublishers(args: any) {
        return {
            content: [{
                    type: "text",
                    text: JSON.stringify(await makeOpenAlexRequest("/publishers", args), null, 2)
                }]
        };
    }
  • The input schema definition for the 'search_publishers' tool, defining parameters like search, filter, sort, pagination, etc., as registered in the ListTools response.
    {
        name: "search_publishers",
        description: "Search publishers",
        inputSchema: {
            type: "object",
            properties: {
                search: { type: "string", description: "Full-text search query" },
                filter: { type: "string", description: "Key:value OpenAlex filters. Supports entity attributes (e.g., 'country_codes', 'hierarchy_level'), IDs, and convenience filters (e.g., 'display_name.search'). Example: 'country_codes:US,hierarchy_level:0'" },
                sort: { type: "string", description: "Sort field with optional :desc" },
                page: { type: "number", description: "Page number" },
                per_page: { type: "number", description: "Results per page (max 200)" },
                cursor: { type: "string", description: "Cursor for deep pagination" },
                group_by: { type: "string", description: "Group results by field" },
                select: { type: "string", description: "Fields to return" },
                sample: { type: "number", description: "Random sample size" },
                seed: { type: "number", description: "Random seed" },
                mailto: { type: "string", description: "Email for rate limits" },
                api_key: { type: "string", description: "Premium API key" }
            }
        }
    },
  • src/index.ts:291-292 (registration)
    The registration/dispatch case in the main tool handler switch statement that routes calls to the searchPublishers function.
    case "search_publishers":
        return await searchPublishers(args);
Behavior1/5

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

The description offers zero behavioral information beyond the basic 'search' action. With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but fails to disclose any behavioral traits - no information about rate limits, authentication requirements (though api_key parameter hints at premium access), pagination behavior, or what the search actually returns. For a 12-parameter search tool with no annotations, this is completely inadequate.

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

Conciseness2/5

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

While technically concise with only two words, this represents under-specification rather than effective conciseness. The description fails to provide any meaningful information that would help an AI agent understand or use the tool. Every word should earn its place, but here the words don't provide sufficient value to justify their inclusion.

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

Completeness1/5

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

For a complex search tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is completely inadequate. It provides no information about what the tool returns, how results are structured, what 'search' actually means in this context, or any behavioral characteristics. The description fails to compensate for the lack of structured metadata, leaving significant gaps in understanding.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema already provides comprehensive documentation for all 12 parameters. The description adds absolutely no parameter information beyond what's in the schema. According to scoring rules, when schema_description_coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no parameter information in the description, which applies here.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description 'Search publishers' is a tautology that merely restates the tool name without adding any meaningful context. It lacks a specific verb-resource combination and doesn't distinguish this tool from its many search-related siblings (search_authors, search_funders, etc.). While it indicates the general domain (publishers), it fails to specify what kind of search this performs or what makes it unique.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines1/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides absolutely no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling search tools (search_authors, search_funders, search_institutions, etc.), there's no indication that this tool is specifically for publishers or when one would choose it over other search tools. No context, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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/reetp14/openalex-mcp'

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