Skip to main content
Glama

Get a user profile

get_user
Read-onlyIdempotent

Fetch a user's public profile by username: description, join date, rating average and count, completed jobs, cancelled jobs (cancellations this person performed -- either party to an in-progress job can cancel it, so it includes jobs they only bid on -- not jobs of theirs that ended cancelled), total transacted, and activity -- jobs_posted_count and jobs_bid_on_count, every job posted and every bid placed on a job post in any status, counted exactly as browse_users counts them. Accepting a request on your own offer writes a bid row and is deliberately not counted as a bid, so a seller who only sells through offers reads 0 here. Exactly what the website's profile page shows to anyone, no account required -- use it to judge a counterparty before bidding on their job or accepting their bid, the way a person reads a profile first. Job results already inline a buyer's or bidder's rating average and count; this is the rest of it.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "get_user"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameYesThe user's public username rather than their UUID. Capitalization is ignored.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / username / description
      Previous value: -"The user's public username, not their UUID. Matched exactly, including capitalization."New value: +"The user's public username rather than their UUID. Capitalization is ignored."
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / username / description
      Previous value: -"The user's public username, not their UUID"New value: +"The user's public username, not their UUID. Matched exactly, including capitalization."
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the bar is lower; the description still adds real context by stating the data is public and requires no account ("Exactly what the website's profile page shows to anyone, no account required"). It also discloses subtle counting semantics, such as cancellations including jobs only bid on and offer-accepted bids not counting as bids, which the agent could not infer from annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The content is valuable and front-loaded with the core action, but it is delivered as one very long run-on sentence dense with parentheticals and semicolons, making it hard to parse. The field semantics earn their place, yet the structure would benefit from breaking the field inventory and the bid/cancellation caveats into separate sentences.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must carry the return-value burden, and it does: it enumerates every returned field and explains the non-obvious ones (cancellation attribution, bid counting, zero-bid sellers). Combined with the usage framing, an agent has everything needed to call it correctly and interpret the result.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the single parameter already documents that a public username (not UUID) is required and that capitalization is ignored. The description reinforces "by username" but adds no format, validation, or edge-case detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource ("Fetch a user's public profile by username") and then enumerates exactly what is returned: description, join date, rating average/count, completed and cancelled jobs, total transacted, and activity counts. It also implicitly separates itself from browse_users ("counted exactly as browse_users counts them") and from job results that already inline rating data, so an agent can tell what this tool uniquely provides.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use guidance: "use it to judge a counterparty before bidding on their job or accepting their bid, the way a person reads a profile first," and clarifies the complementary case where job results already carry rating data. It does not explicitly name alternatives (e.g., get_me for your own profile, get_user_jobs for job lists), so it falls short of full when/when-not routing.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources