Fetch a Blaze Media contributor profile by slug or canonical URL, returning public details and up to 30 recent article feed items.
Get a Blaze Media contributor profile. Returns a public /u/ profile and up to 30 recent article feed items. Provide exactly one of slug or canonical profile URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Canonical HTTPS theblaze.com/u/<slug> profile URL | |
| slug | No | TheBlaze author username |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.9Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose useful behavior: the result is a public profile plus up to 30 recent article feed items, revealing both content and an implicit result-size limit. It omits pagination and auth details, but for a public read tool the coverage is above average.
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?
Three tight sentences: what it returns, what the return contains, and the input rule. Front-loaded with the action and zero filler.
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?
No output schema exists, so the description correctly compensates by summarizing the return payload (profile plus up to 30 feed items). Nothing critical is missing for a simple two-optional-parameter lookup, though edge cases like invalid slug handling are unaddressed.
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 parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds a constraint the schema does not express: mutual exclusivity ('Provide exactly one of slug or canonical profile URL'), which genuinely guides invocation beyond the structured fields.
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 Blaze Media contributor profile') and names the site, which distinguishes it from the many sibling *_author tools for other publishers. An agent can tell it returns a person/contributor profile rather than articles or headlines.
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 description gives an input constraint ('Provide exactly one of slug or canonical profile URL') but never states when to choose this tool over siblings like theblaze_article or theblaze_headlines. Usage must be inferred from the resource name.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.