Skip to main content
Glama

profile_enrich

Read-onlyIdempotent

Freshest LIVE snapshot of one profile, by handle or entityId — not the deduplicated dataset record the other profile/* endpoints return. Carries live-only flags (openToWork, isHiring, isTopVoice) and returns the person's entityId, the id every other live person endpoint needs. (Costs 10 Zooq credits.)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
handleNoPublic profile handle. Provide handle OR entityId (entityId wins if both).
entityIdNoPerson entityId from a previous profile_enrich or profile_entity_id call. Provide handle OR entityId.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
handleNoExample value was a string
premiumNoExample value was a boolean
entityIdNoExample value was a string
fullNameNoExample value was a string
headlineNoExample value was a string
industryNoExample value was a string
isHiringNoExample value was a boolean
lastNameNoExample value was a string
locationNo
firstNameNoExample value was a string
influencerNoExample value was a boolean
isTopVoiceNoExample value was a boolean
openToWorkNoExample value was a boolean
followerCountNoExample value was a number
connectionsCountNoExample value was a number

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already indicate read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context by noting live-only flags, the freshness of the snapshot, the distinction from deduplicated records, and the 10-credit cost, which goes beyond what annotations alone provide.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core value proposition: a fresh live snapshot. It then adds the key differentiator, the important output field, and the cost in a few tightly scoped sentences with no filler.

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?

Given the low parameter count, rich annotations, and presence of an output schema, the description covers what the tool does, how to call it, what distinguishes it, what it returns, and a usage cost. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both handle and entityId parameters and the precedence rule. The description mentions 'by handle or entityId' but adds no new parameter-level detail beyond what is already in the 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 this returns a live profile snapshot by handle or entityId and explicitly contrasts it with the deduplicated dataset records returned by other profile/* endpoints. It names the key output (entityId) and distinguishes itself from siblings like profile_full and profile_entity_id.

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?

The description explains that this tool is for live data, not deduplicated records, and that the returned entityId is needed by other live person endpoints. It does not name specific sibling tools or formal exclusions, but the context makes the appropriate use case reasonably clear.

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.

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Disambiguation2/5

Many tools have strongly overlapping purposes: companies_name_lookup is explicitly equivalent to search_companies, companies_enrich/companies_info/companies_universal_name_to_id all return company-profile data, and profile_full overlaps with profile_employment_history and profile_enrich. The descriptions are detailed, but an agent would still frequently have to choose between near-duplicate endpoints.

Naming Consistency4/5

Tool names mostly follow a predictable resource-prefixed snake_case pattern, such as companies_*, jobs_*, posts_*, profile_*, and search_*, which makes the set readable and groupable. Minor inconsistencies like jobs_details_v2, g_title_skills_lookup, and mixed noun suffixes (info/details/full/lookup) keep it from a perfect score.

Tool Count2/5

44 tools is well beyond the heavy 25+ band, and several tools appear to be different lookup modes or near-duplicates of the same underlying capability. The broad LinkedIn-style data domain explains much of the size, but the set still feels bloated rather than well-scoped.

Completeness4/5

The API covers the core read-only professional-data workflows well: people, companies, jobs, posts, comments, likes, email discovery/verification, schools, skills, and targeted searches. Minor gaps exist, such as some job filters being unusable and no direct exposure of certain profile alias endpoints, but agents can generally complete end-to-end workflows.

Resources