Skip to main content
Glama

Find a work by its title

search_works
Read-onlyIdempotent

Find works in the Bibliothèque nationale de France catalogue by title words and retrieve identifiers for editions and related records.

Instructions

Find a work in the Bibliothèque nationale de France catalogue by words in its title, and get the identifier get_work and list_editions take. A row matches when its title carries every word given. The index returns no measure of how well a row matches, so the rows are in index order and the work a person would call the obvious answer can sit anywhere in the list or on a later page. A study of a book carries the book's title, so a search for a famous title returns the criticism alongside the work. Read 'creators' to tell them apart. This reads titles and nothing else. It cannot find the works of a named person: searching a person's name returns works written about them, whose creators are their critics. 'status' says whether the BnF has established the work as a record of its own or holds it provisionally under a title it has catalogued.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNo
limitNo
titleYesWords from the title, such as 'saison enfer'. Every word given has to appear.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageYes
notesYes
titleYesThe words asked for.
worksYes
has_moreYes
retrieved_atYesWhen these metadata were read from data.bnf.fr, as an ISO 8601 instant. The BnF licence asks for this date to be stated wherever the metadata are shown, so repeat it alongside the source.
words_searchedYes
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (read-only, idempotent), the description discloses crucial behaviors: every word must appear, results are in index order with no relevance ranking, and the 'status' field indicates provisional vs established records. This is valuable context not captured by structured data.

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?

The description is a bit long but every sentence earns its place, covering edge cases and practical usage. It is well-structured, moving from core function to matching logic to caveats, with no redundant filler.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what identifiers it returns, how matching works, the lack of relevance ordering, and how to interpret results with 'creators' and 'status'. It leaves no obvious questions unanswered.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The description explains the matching semantics for the 'title' parameter (every word must appear) and gives a clear example. While it does not elaborate on 'page' and 'limit', these are standard pagination parameters with schema defaults and constraints, so the description adequately compensates for the low schema coverage.

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?

The description clearly states the tool finds works in the BnF catalogue by title words and returns identifiers used by get_work and list_editions. It further distinguishes itself from search_authors by specifying it reads titles only and cannot search by person name.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It gives explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives: it mentions that searching a person's name returns works about them, implying search_authors should be used for author queries. It also warns about criticism articles carrying the book's title, so users know to filter by 'creators'.

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/smeet666/mcp-databnf'

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