Extract a PEOPLE author's public profile and recent articles from a canonical URL, returning name, title, bio, social links, and structured intro fields.
Get a PEOPLE author profile. Returns a PEOPLE staff writer or contributor's public profile (name, job title, structured intro fields, biography, personal social links) and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical PEOPLE 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 present, so the description must disclose behavior. It states it returns a public profile, implying a read operation, but does not explicitly mention side effects, permissions, rate limits, or any constraints. It adds the detail of recent articles but lacks explicit safety disclaimers.
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 two sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource, and then details the return contents. No waste.
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 fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description lists the return fields, which is adequate. It could mention error conditions or response format, but given its simplicity, it is fairly complete.
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 provides 100% coverage with a clear description of the 'url' parameter as 'Canonical PEOPLE author URL'. The description repeats this in its second sentence but adds no new semantic details.
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 tool fetches a PEOPLE author profile and enumerates the data returned (name, job title, structured intros, biography, social links, recent articles). It distinguishes from sibling tools like people_article (which fetches an article) and people_sections (which fetches sections).
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?
It does not explicitly mention when to use this over alternatives. It implies usage when you have a canonical author URL, but there is no guidance on exclusions or comparison to other tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.