Fetches a Telegraph author's byline metadata, biography, and recent articles from a canonical author URL. Returns structured JSON for author profiling.
Get a Telegraph author profile. Returns a Telegraph author's byline metadata, biography, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical Telegraph author URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does state what the call returns (byline metadata, biography, recent articles), which is useful, but it does not mention failure modes, pagination/limits on recent articles, or input validation expectations. The behavioral profile is partial but not misleading.
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?
A single, information-dense sentence front-loads the action and resource, then immediately specifies the returned content and required input. There is no filler or repetition beyond reinforcing the canonical-URL requirement.
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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what the tool does and what it returns. The only notable gap is that it does not specify limits or shape of the 'recent articles' portion, but this is minor for a tool this straightforward.
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 input schema already describes the url as 'Canonical Telegraph author URL' with 100% coverage. The description repeats 'canonical author URL' but adds no new semantic detail about format, encoding, or how to obtain the URL, so it does not exceed the baseline.
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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Get a Telegraph author profile') and enumerates the returned contents (byline metadata, biography, recent articles). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like telegraph_article or telegraph_headlines, which fetch different resources.
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?
The phrase 'from a canonical author URL' makes the usage context clear: the agent should call this when it has a Telegraph author URL and needs profile information. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it falls short of full guidance.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.