“…Several heuristics for assessing the water stability of MOFs have been proposed, informed by examples of experimentally realized MOFs with varying levels of water stability. − ,,− Exemplary of these heuristics is a proposal to strengthen the metal–linker bond by selecting stronger bonding metal–linker combinations such as Zr 4+ with carboxylate linkers, an approach that has proven to be effective. ,, Such combinations can be selected using Pearson’s hard–soft acid–base (HSAB) theory, whereby, high-valent, hard metals are expected to form strong bonds with hard bases, e.g., Zr 4+ with oxygen-coordinating carboxylate linkers, while lower-valent, softer metals are expected to form strong bonds with soft base linkers, e.g., Co 2+ with nitrogen-coordinating azolate linkers. ,,− Nevertheless, there are exceptions to this rule, such as the water-stable MOF PIZA-1, which contains Co(II) nodes and carboxylate-coordinating linkers. , Another commonly used heuristic is that metal nodes with many connection points to linkers lead to water-stable MOFs, as their high coordination numbers both sterically prevent water from approaching the metal–linker bond and lead to a kinetic barrier to water-mediated degradation as multiple bonds need to be disrupted prior to framework collapse. − ,,, Even so, there exist numerous examples of water-stable MOFs with low coordination SBUs, − indicating that a high number of linker connection points is not strictly required. Thus, heuristics developed based on the strength and number of metal–linker bonds in MOFs cannot reliably predict MOF water stability.…”