Crawlora MCP

rottentomatoes_publication

Read-only

Fetch one Rotten Tomatoes publication: name, encrypted id, editorial page, image, top-publication and Tomatometer-approved flags, follower and review counts, and the critics who write for it with their names, encrypted ids, profile URLs and top-critic flags. Take the id from encrypted_publication_id or publication_id on any review row returned by the review tools. Use rottentomatoes_publication_reviews for its review feed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "rottentomatoes_publication"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Publication id: encrypted_publication_id or publication_id

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`data`	Yes	The tool result payload (shape varies per tool; see each tool's docs resource).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 30, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the agent knows this is a safe external read operation. The description confirms it fetches a single publication and lists returned data, but it does not add behavioral context beyond the annotations, such as error handling or whether missing publications return null or error. With annotations covering the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose and then gives id sourcing and the alternative tool. The long enumeration of returned fields is somewhat verbose, especially because an output schema exists, but the overall structure is efficient and every part serves selection or invocation.

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?

For a simple one-parameter read tool with annotations and an output schema, this description is complete enough: it states what is fetched, where to get the id, and which sibling handles reviews. The output schema already carries return-value details, so no further description is required.

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

Parameters4/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the parameter already documents the two id forms. The description adds meaningful guidance by saying 'Take the id from encrypted_publication_id or publication_id on any review row returned by the review tools,' which tells the agent where to source a valid id rather than only what shape it has.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch one Rotten Tomatoes publication.' It enumerates the publication fields returned and names the sibling tool for review feeds, so an agent can distinguish it from related tools without opening schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It explicitly tells the agent where to obtain the id: 'Take the id from encrypted_publication_id or publication_id on any review row returned by the review tools.' It also names the alternative tool to use for reviews: 'Use rottentomatoes_publication_reviews for its review feed.'

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

All Crawlora MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?