Skip to main content
Glama
wuruiqi

academic-workflow-mcp

by wuruiqi

workflow_confirm_review

Update Obsidian note status to 'reviewed' and modify Zotero tags to confirm completion of literature review.

Instructions

Mark a literature note as reviewed: update the Obsidian frontmatter status to 'reviewed' and update the Zotero item tags.

Call this only after the human has reviewed and approved the note.

Args: citekey: Better BibTeX citekey. item_key: Zotero internal item key. tag_remove: Zotero tag to remove (default "在读" / "reading"). tag_add: Zotero tag to add (default "已精读" / "reviewed").

Returns: {"success": bool, "obsidian": {...}, "zotero": {...}}

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
citekeyYes
tag_addNo已精读
item_keyYes
tag_removeNo在读
Behavior4/5

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

Discloses the write operations (updating Obsidian and Zotero) and the return structure, compensating for absent annotations. Lacks details on error handling or side effects.

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?

Concise and well-structured with an Args section, but slightly verbose with default values repeated in both the description and schema.

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 action, all parameters with defaults, and return format exhaustively, making it fully self-contained for an agent to use.

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 adds full meaning for all four parameters, including types and defaults, citing specific examples like 'Better BibTeX citekey' and tag defaults with translations.

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 it marks a literature note as reviewed by updating Obsidian frontmatter and Zotero tags, using specific verbs and resources. This distinguishes it from sibling workflow tools.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

Explicitly states to call only after human review and approval, providing clear when-to-use guidance. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use.

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/wuruiqi/academic-workflow-mcp'

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