Retrieve a Us Weekly author's biography, contact links, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
Get a Us Weekly author profile. Returns a Us Weekly author's biography, contact links, and recent articles from a canonical author URL.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | Canonical Us Weekly author URL |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return content (biography, contact links, recent articles), which is helpful, but does not mention side effects, rate limits, or error behavior. Not misleading, just incomplete on non-return behaviors.
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 with the action and resource front-loaded, followed by a clear list of return contents. No filler or redundant phrasing.
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 single-parameter retrieval tool with no output schema, it describes the input source and the main return fields. It lacks any mention of URL format specifics or response structure, but the simplicity of the tool makes this mostly 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?
Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the url parameter. The description repeats 'canonical author URL' and adds output details, but does not enrich parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides.
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 Us Weekly author profile', and lists return content (biography, contact links, recent articles). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like usmagazine_article, usmagazine_headlines, and other author tools by naming the exact resource.
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?
Implies usage by requiring a 'canonical author URL', which tells the agent when to call it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, leaving the agent to infer selection from the tool name and siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.