Lacuna Research MCP

Get Paper

get_paper

Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a Lacuna paper by artifact ID or URL and choose context, metadata, summary, figures, concepts, or related-paper views.

Instructions

Fetch a Lacuna paper by artifact id or paper URL.

include_resources adds linked resources (code repositories, datasets, models, and demos) in context and full views by default. Pass False to omit them; other views ignore this option. Pass a resource entry's id to get_resource for further details.

view selects the response shape. context requests Lacuna's compact agent-oriented context by default, while the four single-field views (blog/figures/concepts/neighbors) return isolated sub-resources:

"context" (default, recommended): agent-oriented summary with summary_markdown, authors, and a small figure preview. Start here for almost everything. Available versions are included when present; to read another version, use its artifact ID from the returned version list.
"full": raw upstream paper record. Cheaper than context when you only need basic metadata.
"preview": compact card with unique fields excerpt, excerpt_kind, bookmarked. Use for citation-style display.
"blog": just the summary_markdown content, without the rest of the context envelope.
"figures": just the figures list.
"concepts": just the concepts list.
"neighbors": just the related-papers list.

figure_limit (context view only) caps the figure preview (server default 3). Pass 0 to suppress figure previews while keeping a figures_truncated signal.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Default
`view`	No	context
`figure_limit`	No
`include_resources`	No
`artifact_id_or_url`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.3.0Sep 21, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / include_resources

Added value: +{
+  "default": true,
+  "title": "Include Resources",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}

First observedv0.2.0Jul 31, 2026

TDQS

A4.9/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world, so the safety profile is covered. The description goes well beyond them: it explains the include_resources default and that non-context views ignore it, that figure_limit only affects context view and that 0 suppresses previews while keeping a truncation signal, and that versions are surfaced for follow-up fetches.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

Front-loads the core action, then uses tight bullets per view where each line earns its place. It is somewhat long, but the length is justified by seven enum values and three documented parameters; a few clauses (e.g., repeated mention of context-view-only options) could be trimmed.

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?

Covers the four parameters, the default view, resource inclusion, and figure limiting, and even outlines the response shape of each view despite an output schema existing. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

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

Parameters5/5

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

With 0% schema coverage, the description carries the full burden and does so thoroughly: all seven `view` enum values are defined with what each returns, `include_resources` default and view-specific behavior are stated, and `figure_limit`'s default, scope, and 0-value semantics are explained. This is exactly the compensation a 0%-coverage schema requires.

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 ("Fetch") and resource ("a Lacuna paper") plus the two accepted identifier forms (artifact id or paper URL). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like get_hypothesis, get_direction, and get_resource, which fetch different resource types.

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance per view: "context (default, recommended)... Start here for almost everything," "preview... Use for citation-style display," and "full... Cheaper than context when you only need basic metadata." It also routes the agent to the sibling get_resource for deeper resource details.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server