Retrieve a Los Angeles Times author's byline metadata, biography, social links, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
Get a Los Angeles Times author profile. Returns a Los Angeles Times author's byline metadata, biography, contact/social links, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical Los Angeles Times author URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the output categories but does not state that the operation is read-only, mention error behavior, permissions, or any constraints. This is a notable gap for a retrieval tool.
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?
Two concise sentences with the primary purpose front-loaded and no redundant filler. It efficiently communicates the tool's function and expected input.
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 simple single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately lists the types of data returned. It does not detail the output structure, but given the low complexity, this is reasonably complete. A mention of error handling would improve it, but it's not severely incomplete.
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 schema already documents the single parameter 'url' as 'Canonical Los Angeles Times author URL' (100% coverage). The description repeats this phrasing without adding new semantic detail, so it adds no value beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'Los Angeles Times author profile', and enumerates specific returned data (byline metadata, biography, contact/social links, recent articles). This distinguishes it from the sibling latimes_article and other article tools, making its purpose unmistakable.
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 implies usage for author profile retrieval but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like latimes_article. There is no explicit 'when not to use' or reference to alternative tools, so guidance is only implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.