Fetch Product Hunt product makers by product slug to identify who built or launched a product. Use the optional cursor to paginate through maker results.
Retrieve Product Hunt product makers. Returns maker items for a Product Hunt product.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Product Hunt slug | |
| cursor | No | Pagination cursor |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states returns maker items but does not mention pagination behavior, authentication, rate limits, or error handling. The cursor parameter hints at pagination but is not explained.
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 short sentences, but the second sentence largely restates the first. Still, it is not verbose and front-loads the purpose. Minor redundancy prevents a 5.
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 retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is adequate but could benefit from clarifying pagination (cursor is optional?), error cases, or what constitutes a valid slug. With many siblings, more context would help an agent decide.
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?
Schema coverage is 100%, with both parameters described in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. As per guidelines, baseline is 3.
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 action (retrieve) and the resource (Product Hunt product makers). It distinguishes from sibling tools like producthunt_product or producthunt_reviews by specifying 'makers'.
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?
No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, context, or when not to use it. With many sibling producthunt tools, this omission is a notable gap.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.