Fiverr seller profile: display name, one-liner title, description, country, seller level, verification status, hourly rate, spoken languages, join date, and gig ids.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| Username | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | Yes | The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe-read profile is covered. The description adds the useful fact that gig ids are returned, which hints at chaining into fiverr_gig, but says nothing about pagination, error behavior for unknown usernames, or any rate/auth constraints.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence that lists the payload fields tersely with no filler. It is efficient, though it spends its words enumerating output fields that the output schema already carries.
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?
An output schema exists, so the description need not explain return values, yet that is essentially all it does. It leaves the critical input question unanswered (what a valid Username looks like), which is the main gap for a required-parameter lookup 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 description coverage is 0% and the single required parameter (Username) is completely undocumented in the schema. The description never mentions the parameter or its expected format, so it fails to compensate for the coverage gap that a one-param tool would need.
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 names the resource ('Fiverr seller profile') and enumerates the fields it exposes, so an agent can tell it is a profile lookup rather than a gig or search tool. However, it omits an explicit verb ('retrieve/fetch') and never names the sibling tools (fiverr_search, fiverr_gig) it should be distinguished from.
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?
There is no guidance on when to call this tool versus fiverr_search or fiverr_gig, and no mention that a seller username is required or how to obtain one. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and the required Username field.
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.
