authorsSearch LibriVox authors by last name or keyword; supports pagination via limit/offset. Returns author id, first/last name, and a link to their LibriVox profile.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| query | No | ||
| offset | No | ||
| last_name | No |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| authors | No | List of authors matching search criteria |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / birth_yearRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Birth year",
- "type": [
- "number",
- "null"
- ]
-}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / death_yearRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Death year",
- "type": [
- "number",
- "null"
- ]
-}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / descriptionRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Author biography",
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / dobAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / dodAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / first_nameAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / id / typePrevious value: -"number"New value: +"string"Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / last_nameAdded value: +{
+ "type": "string"
+}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / nameRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Author name",
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / url_librivoxRemoved value: -{
- "description": "LibriVox author page URL",
- "type": "string"
-}Output schema / properties / authors / items / properties / url_wikipediaRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Wikipedia URL if available",
- "type": [
- "string",
- "null"
- ]
-}Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "query": "Austen"
+ },
+ {
+ "last_name": "Shakespeare",
+ "limit": 5
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "authors": {
+ "description": "List of authors matching search criteria",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "birth_year": {
+ "description": "Birth year",
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "death_year": {
+ "description": "Death year",
+ "type": [
+ "number",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ },
+ "description": {
+ "description": "Author biography",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Author ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Author name",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url_librivox": {
+ "description": "LibriVox author page URL",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "url_wikipedia": {
+ "description": "Wikipedia URL if available",
+ "type": [
+ "string",
+ "null"
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds pagination support and return format, but does not disclose behavioral caveats such as result limits or open-world completeness. No contradictions with annotations.
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?
Two tightly structured sentences: one for functionality, one for return values. No redundant or extraneous content, and key details are front-loaded.
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?
With annotations and an output schema, the description provides adequate context for invoking the tool. It could add more on parameter ranges or usage scenarios, but it is complete enough for a simple search tool.
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?
Schema has zero description coverage, but the description compensates by mapping query and last_name to search criteria and limit/offset to pagination, covering all four parameters. It does not detail constraints or combinations, but provides sufficient meaning.
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?
Description states 'Search LibriVox authors' with specific search criteria (last name, keyword) and returns (id, name, profile link), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like audiobooks or tracks.
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?
No explicit when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. The usage is implied by the clear purpose, but the description does not contrast with other lookup tools or mention exclusions.
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.
The set mixes several unrelated domains (LibriVox, Pipeworx data lookup, Polymarket betting, memory, subscriptions), and within those domains there is heavy overlap: ask_pipeworx/ask_pipeworx_beta/ask_pipeworx_grounded/deep_research all route to the same 5,798 tools, and polymarket_edges/polymarket_arbitrage/polymarket_edge_tracker/polymarket_fill_risk/bet_research all scan prediction-market opportunities. An agent can easily pick the wrong tool when the same question fits several of them.
Names are mostly lowercase snake_case, but the patterns are inconsistent across domains: some are verb-first (ask_pipeworx, compare_entities, generate_llms_txt), some are noun-first (audiobook, tracks, polymarket_edges), and pluralization varies (audiobook vs audiobooks, authors vs tracks). The Pipeworx family is internally consistent, but the overall set has no unified convention.
35 tools is heavy for a server named Librivox, and only 4 of them (audiobook, audiobooks, authors, tracks) actually relate to LibriVox. The remaining ~31 tools (Pipeworx, Polymarket, memory, subscriptions, AI visibility) make the count far exceed what the server name and apparent purpose suggest.
For a LibriVox-focused server, the tool surface is thin: search and fetch audiobooks, search authors, and list tracks, but no browse by genre, no reader/search-by-reader, no language filter, no author detail endpoint. The Pipeworx side is quite comprehensive, but it does not make up for the gap relative to the server's stated identity.