Skip to main content
Glama
Dthen

iFixit MCP Server

by Dthen

get_user

Fetch an iFixit user's profile with reputation, badges, and join date. Optionally include their repair guides (IDs, titles, URLs) for a complete overview.

Instructions

Fetch an iFixit contributor profile.

Returns the user's profile dict (username, reputation, join_date, badge_counts, ...). With include_guides=True, merges the profile with the user's guide list into {"user": ..., "guides": [...]} where each guide is projected to {guideid, title, url}.

include_guides is all-or-nothing: if either the profile fetch or the guide-list fetch fails (ValueError, network error, or malformed response), the whole call raises a single clean error — partial data is never returned.

Args: user_id: The user id (e.g. 1 or "1"). include_guides: When True, also fetch and include the user's guides (projected to guideid/title/url). Accepts true/false (also as JSON booleans) or 1/0; any other value is rejected with a clean error. limit: Maximum number of guides to include when include_guides=True (1-200, default 20; e.g. 5 or "5"). The API clamps at 200. Validated unconditionally — junk is rejected even when include_guides=False leaves it unused (QA Round 12, F12-7).

Note: Data from iFixit (CC BY-NC-SA). Non-commercial use only.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
limitNo20
user_idYes
include_guidesNofalse

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: it specifies the return dict, the all-or-nothing failure mode that never returns partial data, unconditional validation of limit (even when unused), and API clamping at 200. This goes well beyond a basic fetch, describing error semantics and edge cases.

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?

The description is structured with an Args section and front-loaded purpose, but it is somewhat long and includes a QA reference (F12-7) that is irrelevant to callers. Overall it's well-organized and each sentence earns its place, but slight over-elaboration keeps it from a top score.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given the tool's complexity (conditional merging, validation quirks) and lack of annotations, the description covers all necessary behavior: return shape, errors, licensing, and parameter constraints. Output schema exists, so full return expansion is unnecessary; the description is complete for invocation.

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

Parameters5/5

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

Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates by documenting each parameter in detail: user_id accepts strings or ints, include_guides accepts booleans/1/0 with clean rejection, and limit has range, default, clamping, and unconditional validation notes. This provides essential meaning the schema omits.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description states the core purpose with a specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('iFixit contributor profile'), differentiating it from sibling guide/device tools. It also clarifies the optional guide-merge behavior, further scoping the functionality.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description does not explicitly name alternatives or state when to use this tool versus siblings like get_guide. Usage is implied by the 'Fetch a profile' verb, but there are no exclusions or alternative recommendations, so this is a gap.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/Dthen/ifixit-mcp'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server