Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

rottentomatoes_critic_publications

Rotten Tomatoes critic publications. Returns the publications one Rotten Tomatoes critic writes for: publication name, editorial site URL, logo image, encrypted and numeric publication ids, and the top-publication and Tomatometer-approved…

Instructions

Rotten Tomatoes critic publications. Returns the publications one Rotten Tomatoes critic writes for: publication name, editorial site URL, logo image, encrypted and numeric publication ids, and the top-publication and Tomatometer-approved flags. The list is read directly from Rotten Tomatoes' feed (normally a second or two), with a slower browser fallback when the feed cannot be read. Only the first page is served today; data.page_info.end_cursor reports that more exist. An unknown critic path returns 404. Pass exactly one of path or url.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoAbsolute https://www.rottentomatoes.com critic URL
pathNoRotten Tomatoes critic path: /critic/{slug}. /critics/{slug} (the form critics/authors returns) and /profiles/critic/{slug} are accepted too

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.18

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does well: it discloses feed-first retrieval (normally a second or two), a slower browser fallback, first-page-only pagination with `data.page_info.end_cursor`, and 404 behavior for unknown critic paths. It omits auth/rate-limit details, but for a read-only retrieval tool this is still strong context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with the purpose and return fields, then moves efficiently through retrieval behavior, pagination limits, error behavior, and parameter constraint. It is slightly dense but every sentence adds useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Without an output schema or annotations, the description still explains the returned fields, the pagination limitation, the fallback behavior, and the 404 case. That is enough for an agent to call the tool correctly; minor gaps like latency variability or throttling are not critical here.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds a meaningful constraint not expressed in the schema: exactly one of `path` or `url` must be passed. The schema already documents accepted path forms, so the description appropriately complements rather than repeats it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb and resource: returns the publications a given Rotten Tomatoes critic writes for. It distinguishes the output from a critic profile by focusing on publications, but it does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like rottentomatoes_critic or rottentomatoes_publication.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It states a key usage constraint — pass exactly one of `path` or `url` — and notes the 404 behavior for unknown critic paths. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over related tools such as rottentomatoes_critic, rottentomatoes_critics_authors, or rottentomatoes_publication.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools