Page Lemon

Find a person's records

find_visitor_records

Read-onlyIdempotent

Finds one person's records by email (a privacy request), with copies shown on the site. Export and erase are in the app.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`site`	No
`email`	Yes
`limit`	No
`scope`	No	No site: all, personal or workspace:<id>
`cursor`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedOct 27, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / scope / description
```
Added value: +"No site: all, personal or workspace:<id>"
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 25, 2026
- changedOutput schema / (root)
```
Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "type": "object"
+}
```
Changed1 schema field changedOct 22, 2026
- removedInput schema / properties / site / description
```
Removed value: -"Site name"
```

Changed3 schema fields changedOct 21, 2026

removedInput schema / properties / limit / maximum
```
Removed value: -50
```

changedInput schema / properties / site / description

Previous value: -"Site name, e.g. brave-otter-4821"New value: +"Site name"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -{
-  "additionalProperties": {},
-  "properties": {
-    "agent_message": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "confirm_token": {
-      "type": "string"
-    },
-    "error": {
-      "description": "On failure (isError): {code, message}"
-    }
-  },
-  "type": "object"
-}New value: +null

AddedOct 20, 2026

TDQS

A3.7/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The description adds crucial operational context beyond the annotations. Mentioning that the results are 'with copies shown on the site' and that it functions as a 'privacy request' adds necessary behavioral context for the agent.

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 concise and efficiently communicates the tool's main function and constraints in a single, well-structured sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the tool is clearly defined as read-only, it is not contextually complete for an AI agent because it fails to clarify how the filtering parameters (site, scope) affect the output or the search behavior. The low parameter coverage requires the description to do more work than it does.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Despite having 5 parameters defined in the schema, the description only mentions the primary identifier ('email'). Given the low schema description coverage (20%), the description fails to provide any semantic meaning or context for the filtering parameters like 'site', 'scope', 'limit', or 'cursor'.

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's function: finding records based on an email address. It distinguishes its scope by specifying that this is related to a 'privacy request,' which helps differentiate it from general record retrieval tools.

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 provides helpful constraints regarding the tool's scope by noting that functions like 'Export and erase' are explicitly handled by the dedicated application, guiding the agent toward correct tool selection for mutation tasks.

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

All Page Lemon tools Inspect

Try in Browser

Claude Code, inside the Godot 4 editorFlockbay puts an AI agent in the real Godot 4 editor: it writes GDScript, runs your game and fixes what breaks. Free, or bring your own Claude Code or Codex.flockbay.comAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?