Fetch a public Sportskeeda author profile by slug or canonical URL and get the author's name plus recent article links.
Get a Sportskeeda author profile. Returns one public Sportskeeda author's name and recent article links from the canonical author profile.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Canonical Sportskeeda /author/<slug> URL; alternative to slug | |
| slug | No | Sportskeeda author slug, e.g. sripad |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it partially does so by describing the return shape (name plus recent article links) and that the profile is public. It omits any note on auth, rate limits, or whether links are truncated/paginated.
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?
Two short sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the output described second. No filler, though the second sentence partially restates the first.
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 read-only profile getter with no output schema, the description adequately previews the returned fields (name and recent article links). It is nearly complete given the tool's low complexity.
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%, so both url and slug are already documented with their formats. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, which is the expected baseline when the schema does the heavy lifting.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Get a Sportskeeda author profile') and further clarifies the payload ('name and recent article links'). The Sportskeeda namespace plus the explicit description makes it distinguishable from sibling author tools, though it does not name any sibling directly.
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 versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites. The 'canonical author profile' phrasing hints at sourcing but never explains the selecting condition between url and slug or against sibling tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.