collectionFetch metadata for a single Unsplash collection by id, including title, description, total photos, tags, cover photo, and curator profile.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Unique collection identifier | |
| title | No | Collection title | |
| description | No | Collection description | |
| total_photos | No | Number of photos in collection |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds valuable context by enumerating the returned metadata fields (title, description, total photos, tags, cover photo, curator profile), which is behaviorally informative beyond the 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?
The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It contains no redundant words and every phrase adds meaning, making it an exemplar of conciseness.
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?
Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema present, robust annotations), the description is complete. It lists the key metadata fields returned, and with the output schema available, there's no need for further elaboration. It covers the essential usage context for an agent.
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?
With only one parameter 'id', schema description coverage is 0%, but the description's 'by id' makes the parameter's purpose obvious. The example in the schema further clarifies the format. The description adds sufficient context for the single, simple parameter.
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 states a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('metadata for a single Unsplash collection by id'), clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like 'collections' (plural) and 'collection_photos' (photos within a collection). This makes the tool's purpose immediately clear.
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 phrase 'by id' and 'single collection' provides clear context for when to use this tool (when you have a specific collection id). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the distinction from similarly named siblings is evident, so it earns a 4 rather than 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.