Skip to main content
Glama
Selenium39

Qiita API MCP Server

get_users

Retrieve a list of users from the Qiita developer community platform. Specify page numbers and results per page to browse user profiles.

Instructions

ユーザー一覧を取得します

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)

Implementation Reference

  • Handler for the 'get_users' tool. It uses paginationSchema for input validation and delegates execution to QiitaApiClient.getUsers with page and perPage parameters.
    get_users: {
      schema: paginationSchema,
      execute: async ({ page, perPage }, client) => client.getUsers(page, perPage),
    },
  • MCP Tool definition for 'get_users', including name, description, and input schema for pagination parameters.
    {
      name: 'get_users',
      description: 'ユーザー一覧を取得します',
      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,
          },
        },
        required: [],
      },
    },
  • QiitaApiClient.getUsers method that performs the actual API call to fetch users list from Qiita's /users endpoint with pagination.
    async getUsers(page = 1, perPage = 20) {
      const response = await this.client.get('/users', {
        params: { page, per_page: perPage },
      });
      return response.data;
    }
  • Zod schema used by the get_users handler for input validation (pagination parameters).
    const paginationSchema = z.object({
      page: z.number().int().min(1).max(100).default(1),
      perPage: z.number().int().min(1).max(100).default(20),
    });
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. The description only states what the tool does ('get user list') without revealing any behavioral traits: it doesn't mention pagination behavior (implied by parameters but not described), authentication requirements, rate limits, what data is returned, or whether this is a read-only operation. For a tool with no annotation coverage, this leaves significant gaps in understanding how it behaves.

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 in Japanese that directly states the tool's function with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a simple retrieval tool and front-loads the core purpose immediately. Every word earns its place without being overly terse or verbose.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and the description provides minimal context, this is incomplete for effective use. The description doesn't explain what kind of user data is returned, how results are structured, or any behavioral constraints. For a paginated list tool in a system with multiple user-related tools, more context about scope and output would be needed for the agent to use it correctly.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters (page, perPage) fully documented in the schema with descriptions, types, defaults, and ranges. The description adds no parameter information beyond what the schema provides. According to scoring rules, when schema coverage is high (>80%), the baseline is 3 even with no param info in the description, which applies here.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The description 'ユーザー一覧を取得します' (Get user list) clearly states the verb ('取得します' - get/retrieve) and resource ('ユーザー一覧' - user list), providing a basic purpose. However, it doesn't distinguish this from sibling tools like get_user (singular) or get_authenticated_user, making it vague about scope differentiation. The purpose is understandable but lacks specificity about what kind of user list this returns.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With sibling tools like get_user (for a specific user), get_authenticated_user (for the current user), and get_user_followers/followees (for relationship data), there's no indication of when this paginated list tool is appropriate versus those more targeted tools. No usage context, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned.

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