No user-submitted related servers found.
Scored across 31 tools
Per-source searches (arxiv, pubmed, scopus, crossref, etc.) are clearly distinct, but the set also contains three overlapping entry points for general discovery: search_papers, search_literature, and the union of all source-specific tools, with no guidance on when to prefer each. The download path is similarly crowded (download_paper, download_public_paper, get_paper_markdown, discover_paper_access, get_paper_by_doi), and get_platform_status vs get_source_status plus get_citations vs get_literature_records are near-duplicates that an agent can easily pick wrongly.
Every name is snake_case with a leading verb (search_, get_, download_, create_, save_, export_, check_, expand_, discover_) followed by a clear object. The verb varies by semantics rather than arbitrarily, so patterns like search_<source> and get_<resource> are immediately predictable.
31 tools exceeds a comfortable surface for an agent, and the count is inflated by redundancy rather than coverage: twelve source-specific search tools sit alongside two generic search tools (search_papers, search_literature) that already aggregate them. Several download/status tools could be consolidated or folded into options on existing tools.
The literature workflow is covered end to end: discovery across many sources, hydration by record_id/DOI, one-hop citation expansion, screening persistence, export to BibTeX/RIS/JSON, PDF retrieval, and source health/status. Minor gaps exist around research briefs (create_research_brief exists but no get/list/delete brief) and no way to inspect or clean up stored search sessions beyond the source-status counts.