Skip to main content
Glama
Selenium39

Qiita API MCP Server

get_items

Retrieve articles from Qiita's developer community platform using pagination and search queries to access technical content.

Instructions

記事一覧を取得します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
pageNoページ番号(1-100)
perPageNo1ページあたりの件数(1-100)
queryNo検索クエリ

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for the 'get_items' MCP tool: validates input schema and executes by calling QiitaApiClient.getItems(page, perPage, query).
    get_items: {
      schema: paginationSchema.extend({
        query: z.string().optional(),
      }),
      execute: async ({ page, perPage, query }, client) =>
        client.getItems(page, perPage, query),
    },
  • MCP tool definition for 'get_items', including name, description, and input schema (page, perPage, optional query). Used for tool listing.
    {
      name: 'get_items',
      description: '記事一覧を取得します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          page: {
            type: 'number',
            description: 'ページ番号(1-100)',
            default: 1,
          },
          perPage: {
            type: 'number',
            description: '1ページあたりの件数(1-100)',
            default: 20,
          },
          query: {
            type: 'string',
            description: '検索クエリ',
          },
        },
        required: [],
      },
    },
  • QiitaApiClient.getItems method: performs HTTP GET to /items endpoint with pagination and optional query params, returns response data.
    async getItems(page = 1, perPage = 20, query?: string) {
      const response = await this.client.get('/items', {
        params: { page, per_page: perPage, ...(query && { query }) },
      });
      return response.data;
    }
  • Zod input validation schema for 'get_items' handler, extending paginationSchema with optional query.
    schema: paginationSchema.extend({
      query: z.string().optional(),
    }),
Behavior2/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure but provides minimal information. It states the tool retrieves items but doesn't mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior beyond what's in the schema, error conditions, or what format the returned items will have. For a retrieval tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves significant behavioral unknowns.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is extremely concise - a single Japanese sentence that directly states the tool's function. There's no wasted language or unnecessary elaboration. While it may be too brief for complete understanding, it's structurally efficient with zero redundancy.

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

Completeness2/5

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

Given the tool's apparent complexity (retrieving items with filtering/pagination), lack of annotations, no output schema, and multiple similar sibling tools, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'items' are, how they differ from other content types, what fields are returned, or when to choose this over other retrieval tools. The description leaves too many contextual questions unanswered.

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?

The description adds no parameter information beyond what's already in the schema, which has 100% coverage with clear descriptions for page, perPage, and query parameters. The baseline score of 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents all parameters, though the description could have added context about how query filtering works or what 'items' specifically means.

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

Purpose2/5

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

The description '記事一覧を取得します' (Get list of articles) states the basic action but is vague about scope and differentiation. It doesn't specify what type of items are retrieved (articles vs other content) or how it differs from similar sibling tools like get_item, get_tag_items, or get_user_items. The purpose is stated but lacks specificity needed for clear tool selection.

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

Usage Guidelines1/5

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

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple sibling tools that retrieve items (get_item, get_tag_items, get_user_items, get_user_stocks), there's no indication whether this retrieves all items, recently published items, or items matching specific criteria. The agent must guess based on tool name alone.

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/Selenium39/mcp-server-qiita'

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