Retrieve a Townhall author's public profile, including name, photo, bio, X handle, and recent stories, by providing the author slug or profile URL.
Get a Townhall author profile. Returns one Townhall author's public profile: name, photo, bio, X profile, and their most recent stories.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | No | Canonical townhall.com/author/<slug> URL; alternative to slug | |
| slug | No | Author slug, e.g. amy-curtis |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are present, so the description must carry behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the tool returns a public profile (suggesting a read-only lookup) and lists returned fields. However, it does not mention failure behavior, prerequisites, or any side effects beyond the implied read operation.
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 sentences deliver the purpose and return payload with no filler. The core verb and resource are front-loaded, and every sentence contributes.
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?
With no output schema, the description does enumerate return fields, which helps. However, it omits the key operational requirement that the tool needs an author identifier (slug or URL) and does not clarify that neither parameter is truly optional despite the schema listing required: []; an agent could attempt a call with no arguments.
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% and the schema already explains both parameters (canonical URL as alternative to slug, slug example). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 states a specific action and resource: 'Get a Townhall author profile' and enumerates the returned content (name, photo, bio, X profile, recent stories). This distinguishes it from sibling article/news/headlines tools and other author tools by naming the Townhall domain.
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?
Usage context is implied: one would call this to retrieve an author's public profile, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over townhall_article or other author tools, nor any statement that either slug or URL must be supplied. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.