Skip to main content
Glama
Selenium39

Qiita API MCP Server

get_user_items

Retrieve articles posted by a specific user on Qiita, the Japanese developer community platform, using their user ID with pagination support.

Instructions

指定されたユーザーの記事一覧を取得します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userIdYesユーザーID
pageNoページ番号(1-100)
perPageNo1ページあたりの件数(1-100)

Implementation Reference

  • The handler for the 'get_user_items' MCP tool. It defines the input schema by merging userId and pagination schemas, and the execute function which calls QiitaApiClient.getUserItems with the provided parameters.
    get_user_items: {
      schema: userIdSchema.merge(paginationSchema),
      execute: async ({ userId, page, perPage }, client) =>
        client.getUserItems(userId, page, perPage),
    },
  • The tool schema definition for 'get_user_items', including name, description, and inputSchema used for listing tools.
    {
      name: 'get_user_items',
      description: '指定されたユーザーの記事一覧を取得します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          userId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'ユーザーID',
          },
          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,
          },
        },
        required: ['userId'],
      },
  • The helper method in QiitaApiClient that performs the actual HTTP request to fetch the user's items from the Qiita API.
    async getUserItems(userId: string, page = 1, perPage = 20) {
      const response = await this.client.get(`/users/${userId}/items`, {
        params: { page, per_page: perPage },
      });
      return response.data;
    }
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. It mentions retrieval but doesn't describe what format the articles are returned in, whether authentication is required, if there are rate limits, or how pagination works beyond the parameter descriptions. For a tool with 3 parameters and no annotation coverage, this is insufficient behavioral context.

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 a single, efficient sentence that directly states the tool's purpose without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a straightforward retrieval tool and gets straight to the point with no unnecessary elaboration.

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?

For a retrieval tool with 3 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what 'articles' means in this context, what fields are returned, whether authentication is needed, or how to interpret paginated results. The agent would need to guess about important behavioral aspects of this tool.

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 schema has 100% description coverage with clear parameter documentation in Japanese. The description doesn't add any additional semantic context about the parameters beyond what's already in the schema. With complete schema coverage, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the description doesn't compensate but doesn't need to.

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?

The description clearly states the action ('取得します' - retrieves) and resource ('指定されたユーザーの記事一覧' - specified user's article list), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes from general 'get_items' by specifying user-scoped retrieval, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from 'get_user_stocks' which retrieves different content.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_items' (general items) or 'get_user_stocks' (user's stocked items). The description only states what it does, not when it's appropriate or what distinguishes it from sibling tools in the same domain.

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