Retrieve a Kotaku author's profile from a canonical author URL, including name, biography, headshot, social links, and recent articles.
Get a Kotaku author profile. Returns a Kotaku author's name, biography, headshot, social links, and most recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical Kotaku author URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It communicates a non-destructive 'Get' operation and explicitly states what the response will contain. It does not mention limits on 'most recent articles' or exact output structure, but for a simple read-only profile lookup this is a minor gap.
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 entire description is a single concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action and resource, then efficiently lists the output fields without unnecessary detail.
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?
For a one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the core needs: the tool's purpose, the required input type, and the expected return contents. It is slightly vague about the shape or count of 'most recent articles' and social links, but an agent can correctly select and invoke the tool with what is provided.
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?
The input schema already documents the only parameter as 'Canonical Kotaku author URL' with 100% coverage. The description merely restates 'canonical author URL' and adds no new parameter-level meaning, so the schema-driven baseline of 3 is appropriate.
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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get a Kotaku author profile.' It then enumerates the returned data (name, biography, headshot, social links, most recent articles), which makes the tool's purpose concrete and distinguishes it from Kotaku article/news/sections tools and other publications' author tools.
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 description clearly indicates when to use the tool: when an agent has a canonical Kotaku author URL and needs profile information. It does not explicitly name alternatives among the many sibling author tools, but the URL requirement and output-field list make the intended use case unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.