Skip to main content
Glama
Selenium39

Qiita API MCP Server

is_tag_followed

Check if you follow a specific tag on Qiita to manage your developer community interests and content discovery.

Instructions

指定されたタグをフォローしているかどうかを確認します

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tagIdYesタグID

Implementation Reference

  • The core handler function that checks if the authenticated user follows a given tag by making a GET request to Qiita API's /tags/{tagId}/following endpoint. Returns { following: true } on success or { following: false } on 404 error.
    async isTagFollowed(tagId: string) {
      this.assertAuthenticated();
      try {
        await this.client.get(`/tags/${tagId}/following`);
        return { following: true };
      } catch (error: any) {
        if (error.response?.status === 404) {
          return { following: false };
        }
        throw error;
      }
    }
  • JSON schema definition for the 'is_tag_followed' tool, specifying the input parameter 'tagId' as a required string.
    {
      name: 'is_tag_followed',
      description: '指定されたタグをフォローしているかどうかを確認します',
      inputSchema: {
        type: 'object',
        properties: {
          tagId: {
            type: 'string',
            description: 'タグID',
          },
        },
        required: ['tagId'],
      },
    },
  • Registration of the 'is_tag_followed' tool handler, using Zod schema for input validation and delegating to QiitaApiClient's isTagFollowed method.
    is_tag_followed: {
      schema: tagIdSchema,
      execute: async ({ tagId }, client) => client.isTagFollowed(tagId),
    },
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool checks follow status but doesn't reveal whether it requires authentication, returns a boolean or detailed response, has rate limits, or handles errors. For a query tool with zero annotation coverage, this leaves critical behavioral traits unspecified.

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 without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the purpose.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is incomplete for a query tool. It doesn't explain what the return value will be (e.g., boolean, object with status), error conditions, or authentication requirements. While the purpose is clear, the missing behavioral and output details hinder full contextual understanding.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the single parameter 'tagId' documented as 'タグID' (tag ID). The description adds no additional meaning beyond this, such as format examples or source of the tag ID. With high schema coverage, the baseline is 3, as the schema already provides adequate parameter documentation.

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 tool's purpose: '指定されたタグをフォローしているかどうかを確認します' (Check whether the specified tag is being followed). It uses a specific verb ('確認します' - check/verify) and resource ('タグ' - tag), making the action clear. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'follow_tag' or 'unfollow_tag', which would require a 5.

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. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication), compare it to similar tools like 'is_user_followed', or specify scenarios where this check is needed (e.g., before following/unfollowing). Without such context, the agent must infer usage from the 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