get_mana_creatorReturn one creator's public profile and their published creations — the same information their public mana.am profile page shows.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| handle | Yes | Public creator handle, without the @. | |
| locale | No | BCP-47 locale for localized descriptions. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description does not need to repeat those. It adds meaningful context by specifying 'public' and 'published creations', clarifying that unpublished or restricted content is excluded, and that no special access is implied.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and result, then anchors the behavior with a familiar reference to the public profile page. No wasted words or redundant restatements of the tool name.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
For a read-only, idempotent retrieval tool with only one required parameter, the description adequately explains what is returned and the public scope of the data. There is no output schema, but specifying 'profile and published creations' covers the main return expectations sufficiently.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
The input schema already covers both parameters with clear descriptions: the handle should omit '@' and locale is a BCP-47 code. The description does not add parameter-level guidance beyond the schema, but with 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description uses a specific verb, 'Return', and clearly identifies the resource: one creator's public profile plus their published creations. It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_mana_creation (a single creation) and search_mana_creations (search) by emphasizing a single creator and profile-level scope.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The description provides clear usage context: use this when you need one creator's public profile and published creations, the same as their public mana.am profile page. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the one-creator scoping implies when search would be more appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a clearly distinct resource and action: docs vs creations vs creators vs tags, and get vs list vs search. Even the paired doc tools are unambiguous because one returns a single document while the other lists available documents.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern using get_, list_, or search_ plus a resource name. Singular and plural forms are used correctly and predictably.
Six tools is a well-scoped set for a public read-only browsing and documentation server. Each tool covers a distinct user need without redundancy or bloat.
The server covers the core public browsing workflows: discover via tags, search creations, fetch creation details, and view creator profiles. A minor gap is the lack of a way to list or search creators directly, but agents can likely reach creators through creation links.