Retrieve an NZ Herald author's byline metadata, biography, headshot, contact details, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
Get an NZ Herald author profile. Returns an NZ Herald author's byline metadata, biography, headshot, contact details, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical NZ Herald 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 provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly lists the returned fields (byline metadata, biography, headshot, contact details, recent articles) and notes the URL must be canonical, giving the agent a clear picture of what the operation returns and its input constraint. It does not mention side effects or errors, but the read-oriented nature is implied.
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 description is a single, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose and enumerates the return contents without unnecessary words. Every phrase earns its place.
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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately conveys the operation and its expected output. It lacks details on error handling or pagination of 'recent articles', but these are not critical for a basic call and the description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.
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 sole parameter 'url' is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces the meaning by stating 'from a canonical author URL', adding context that the URL must be canonical rather than a search query. This adds semantic value beyond the schema's basic description.
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 states a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('NZ Herald author profile'), and enumerates the returned data (byline metadata, biography, headshot, contact details, recent articles). This clearly distinguishes it from article-related tools like nzherald_article and other 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 implies usage for author profiles and requires a 'canonical author URL', but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., nzherald_article for articles) or state when not to use it. Guidance on selection is left to the agent's inference from the name and description.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.