memkin

Get Entity Profile

get_entity_profile

Retrieve a complete profile for any person, project, or tool, combining linked signals and timeline for a comprehensive overview.

Instructions

get_entity_profile

Full profile for an entity: signals + timeline.

When to use: need a comprehensive view of a person, project, or tool. Returns: entity page with all linked signals and timeline.

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": {
      "entity_slug": "<entity_slug>"
    },
    "name": "get_entity_profile"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`entity_slug`	Yes	Entity slug, for example `entities/alice`.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Jul 13, 2026

TDQS

A4/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the return type ('entity page with all linked signals and timeline') but lacks details on side effects, permissions, or limitations. Adequate but not rich.

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?

Three concise sentences plus a header, front-loaded with purpose. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core behavior. It could mention time range or ordering, but overall it is reasonably complete for decision-making.

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 coverage is 100% with a single parameter well-described in the schema. The description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format or constraints), so baseline 3 applies.

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 verb 'get' and resource 'entity profile' are clear. The description states it returns a comprehensive view with signals and timeline, distinguishing it from siblings like list_signals_by_entity (only signals) and timeline_feed (only timeline).

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 includes a 'When to use' clause specifying need for a comprehensive view of a person, project, or tool. However, it does not mention when not to use or list alternatives.

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