Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Crawlora MCP

Crawlora MCP

Official
by Crawlora-org
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

variety_author

Fetch a Variety author profile with name, bio, photo, social links, and recent articles by slug or URL; paginate results to see next pages.

Instructions

Get a Variety author profile. Returns a Variety author profile with name, biography, photo, social links and one page of recent articles. Give either slug (such as ellise-shafer) or an author url, which may include a /page/<n>/ segment; page (default 1) overrides it. has_next_page shows whether another page exists.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
urlNoCanonical variety.com/author/<slug> URL, optionally with a /page/<n>/ segment; alternative to slug
pageNo1-based page number; overrides any page number in url
slugNoAuthor slug, e.g. ellise-shafer

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.5

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description carries the burden and largely meets it: it enumerates the returned payload (name, biography, photo, social links, one page of recent articles) and discloses pagination behavior via has_next_page. It omits auth/rate-limit or error context, which keeps it from a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, then the return shape, then parameter routing. No filler, though the parameter sentence could be slightly tighter.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a 3-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, returned fields, and pagination adequately. Only the absence of any usage/exclusion guidance leaves a minor gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents slug, url, and page. The description largely restates that (example slug, /page/<n>/ segment, page overriding the URL page) rather than adding new semantics, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Get a Variety author profile"), and the domain qualifier "Variety" separates it from the many other *_author siblings. It doesn't explicitly contrast with variety_article or variety_headlines, so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains how to call the tool (slug vs url) but never states when to reach for this tool versus the sibling article/headline/section tools, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. Usage is only implied by the parameter mechanics.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools