Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

bleacherreport_author

Retrieve a Bleacher Report writer's profile by slug or canonical URL. Returns name, role, bio, photo, and about 20 latest stories.

Instructions

Get a Bleacher Report writer profile. Returns a Bleacher Report writer's profile, identified by slug (such as scott-polacek) or a canonical bleacherreport.com/writers/<slug> url; exactly one is required. The response has name, role, biography, photo and about 20 latest stories with title, URL and thumbnail. Publication times are not shown on the profile, so published_at is omitted; an unknown slug returns 404.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoCanonical bleacherreport.com/writers/<slug> URL; alternative to slug
slugNoWriter slug, e.g. scott-polacek

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.5

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the response contents (name, role, biography, photo, ~20 latest stories), explicitly notes that `published_at` is omitted because the source page lacks it, and documents the 404 behavior for unknown slugs. That is real behavioral context beyond the schema.

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?

A single tight paragraph with no filler; the identity contract (slug or url, exactly one) is front-loaded before output and error details. Every sentence adds information.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description covers what the response returns, what is deliberately absent, and the error case. Nothing an agent needs to call and interpret this tool is missing.

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% so the baseline is 3, but the description adds an example (`scott-polacek`) and an exclusivity constraint ('exactly one is required') that the schema does not enforce since `required` is empty. This meaningfully exceeds the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a Bleacher Report writer profile') and immediately narrows scope to writer profiles versus articles/headlines/sections. An agent can distinguish this from the sibling bleacherreport_article and bleacherreport_news tools without opening the schema.

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?

Gives a clear usage condition: identify the writer by `slug` or canonical `url`, and 'exactly one is required.' It does not name a sibling alternative or state when NOT to use it, but the context of use is unambiguous.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools