Retrieve public Threads profile metadata by username, including biography and visible counts, to support social data analysis.
Retrieve a public Threads profile. Returns public profile metadata for a Threads username, including the visible biography and counts.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| username | Yes | Threads username |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It only discloses that the profile must be public and that visible biography and counts are returned. It does not cover behavior for private or nonexistent profiles, rate limits, authentication needs, or other side effects.
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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every phrase earns its place by identifying the resource, the action, and the key return contents.
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?
The tool is simple with one parameter, and the description gives a reasonable indication of return values (metadata, biography, counts). However, with no output schema, it could add more detail about username format, edge cases, or what 'counts' specifically include, making it only minimally complete.
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 fully describes the single 'username' parameter with 100% coverage, so the description adds little beyond restating that the tool looks up a Threads username. The baseline of 3 applies because 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?
The description uses a specific verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('public Threads profile'), and clarifies the scope by mentioning 'public profile metadata', 'visible biography', and 'counts'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like threads_profile_posts, which return posts rather than profile metadata.
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 implies usage context: it retrieves a public profile for a known Threads username. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over siblings like threads_search or threads_profile_posts, nor does it mention alternatives or exclusions beyond 'public'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.