Skip to main content
Glama

Northwestern University Libraries Digital Collections API

by io.github.nulib

Search

search
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search for works in the Digital Collections using field-based and/or natural language queries. If both a natural language query and specific field values are provided, the natural language query will take priority, using the specified field values as additional constraints. The result will also include a list of aggregations that show how many results match different values for certain fields. For example, you could see how many results match each collection, work type, or visibility and use that information to refine your search. Perform an empty search to retrieve all works and their aggregations. NOTE: Structured field values enclosed in double quotes will be treated as exact, case-sensitive matches, while unquoted values will be treated as full-text searches.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoThe page of search results to return
queryNoA natural language query. Best for exploratory / conceptual searches.
fieldsNoStructured field search. Best when searching for specific known items or values, or for narrowing a search by specifying particular fields to search within.
max_resultsNoThe maximum number of search results to return per page
public_onlyNoOnly include publicly available works in search results

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dataYesThe search results returned from the Digital Collections API
infoYes
explainNoThe explain output from Elasticsearch for the search query. Only included if the MCP is running in debug mode.
paginationYes
aggregationsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
    • changedOutput schema / $schema
      Previous value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"New value: +"https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema"
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the readOnly/idempotent annotations, the description discloses meaningful behaviors: query priority when both inputs are provided, inclusion of aggregations, empty-search behavior, and exact-match semantics for quoted field values. This gives an agent useful expectations before invoking the tool.

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 dense but well-organized: it opens with the core purpose, explains priority and aggregations, covers the empty-search case, and ends with an important quoting note. Every sentence adds useful information without redundancy.

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—nested fields, multiple parameters, and an output schema—the description covers the non-obvious usage aspects, including aggregation results, empty searches, and exact matching. The output schema handles return-value details, so no critical behavioral gap remains.

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 input schema already provides 100% parameter coverage, including descriptions for all nested fields. The description adds valuable semantics beyond the schema, especially the exact matching behavior for double-quoted field values and the priority rule when both query and fields are provided.

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

Purpose4/5

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

The description clearly states the tool searches for works in the Digital Collections using field-based and/or natural language queries, which is a specific verb and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from the sibling similarity-search tool, but the scope and method are clearly communicated.

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?

The description gives practical usage context: how natural language queries and structured fields interact, when to perform an empty search, and how aggregations can guide refinement. It does not explicitly discuss when to prefer this tool over sibling alternatives like similarity-search, but the internal usage guidance is clear.

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

All Northwestern University Libraries Digital Collections API toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.4/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have clear boundaries: search and similarity-search are distinct query modes, and view-* tools are explicitly for interactive viewing while get-work and list-collections return metadata. However, get-work vs view-work and list-collections vs view-collection could cause mild confusion, and view-search-results refers to a 'search-works' tool that is actually named 'search'.

Naming Consistency3/5

Tool names mostly follow a lowercase hyphenated verb-object pattern like get-work, list-collections, and view-work. However, 'search' lacks an object, 'similarity-search' is formatted as a compound noun rather than a verb phrase, and the description for view-search-results references a non-existent 'search-works' tool name.

Tool Count5/5

Eight tools is a well-scoped set for a digital collections API. Each tool serves a distinct function covering search, retrieval, similarity, and interactive viewing without feeling bloated or sparse.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers the core read-only workflows: searching, similarity matching, retrieving work metadata, listing collections, and viewing results interactively. A minor gap is the lack of a direct get-collection metadata tool separate from list-collections, but agents can likely work around this.

Resources