Skip to main content
Glama

Arxiv

by io.github.pipeworx-io

Remember

remember
Idempotent

Save data the agent will need to reuse later — across this conversation or across sessions. Use when you discover something worth carrying forward (a resolved ticker, a target address, a user preference, a research subject) so you don't have to look it up again. Stored as a key-value pair scoped by your identifier. Authenticated users get persistent memory; anonymous sessions retain memory for 24 hours. Pair with recall to retrieve later, forget to delete.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
keyYesMemory key (e.g., "subject_property", "target_ticker", "user_preference")
valueYesValue to store (any text — findings, addresses, preferences, notes)

Schema Changelog

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

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations (idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false) are well-supported. Description adds key details: scoping by identifier, persistence differences (authenticated vs anonymous), and lifetime (24h). No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, usage, behavior. Front-loaded, zero waste, every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a 2-param tool with no output schema, the description fully explains what, when, and how. Includes pairing with recall/forget and persistence behavior. Complete.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for key and value. Description adds value by explaining typical usage (pairing, examples) and scope, going beyond bare schema.

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 saves data for reuse across conversations/sessions, gives concrete examples (resolved ticker, target address, user preference), and distinguishes from siblings 'recall' and 'forget'.

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 says 'Use when you discover something worth carrying forward' and pairs with recall/forget. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use, but the guidance is sufficient for most scenarios.

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

All Arxiv 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

A3.7/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have overlapping purposes, especially the ask_pipeworx variants (ask_pipeworx, ask_pipeworx_beta, ask_pipeworx_grounded) and deep_research, which all route questions to structured data. Additionally, the server includes many prediction market and visibility tools unrelated to the 'Arxiv' name, causing confusion about which tool to use for a given query.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names follow a mostly consistent snake_case verb_noun pattern (e.g., search_papers, get_paper, remember, recall). A few compound names like ask_pipeworx_grounded or polymarket_arbitrage deviate slightly, but overall the naming is predictable and clear.

Tool Count1/5

33 tools is far too many for a server named 'Arxiv'. The core arXiv functionality requires only 2-3 tools (search and fetch), while the rest cover unrelated domains like prediction markets, company profiles, and data retrieval. The tool count severely mismatches the server's stated purpose.

Completeness3/5

For the actual scope (a general-purpose data retrieval platform), the tool set is broad and covers multiple domains (finance, drugs, patents, etc.). However, for the implied arXiv focus, it has basic coverage but lacks features like category listing or author-specific searches. The completeness is adequate for the broad scope but not for the server name.

Resources