Fetch a Pinterest user's boards by username, returning board names, descriptions, cover images, and pin/follower counts from public profile pages.
Get a Pinterest user's boards. Returns a page of a Pinterest user's own boards: name, description, cover image, and pin/follower counts for each. Public data sourced from Pinterest's own profile pages.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | Yes | Pinterest username |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that data is public and sourced from profile pages, and mentions pagination ('a page'), but lacks details on page size, cursors, error cases, or rate limits. It adds useful context but remains incomplete.
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 key action, and each clause adds value without redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.
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?
The return values are enumerated and the data source is noted, which is helpful given no output schema. However, 'a page' leaves pagination semantics unclear (e.g., how to get next pages, default size), and there is no mention of sorting or limits. For a one-parameter tool, it is mostly complete but has a notable gap.
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 'username' with 100% coverage. The description adds minimal semantic value for the parameter, only contextualizing it as belonging to a Pinterest user. No format, uniqueness, or case-sensitivity guidance is given, so the schema baseline of 3 applies.
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 action ('Get a Pinterest user's boards') and resource, and details the returned fields (name, description, cover image, pin/follower counts). It distinguishes itself from sibling Pinterest tools by scoping to a user's own boards.
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?
Usage is implied by the clear purpose, but there is no explicit statement of when to choose this tool over siblings like pinterest_board or pinterest_user_pins. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.