Retrieve an author's details and publication list using their numeric ID. Use this to find author information in the SeqCode Registry by ID.
Retrieve detailed information about a specific author by their numeric ID, including their list of publications.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | Page number for the publications list (1-based). Default: 1. | |
| author_id | Yes | The numeric ID of the author (e.g. 1). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the return content ('detailed information ... including their list of publications'), but says nothing about pagination of that publication list, permission requirements, or behavior for an unknown ID.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the resource and key return content come first. It is efficient, though it is also short enough that it leaves gaps rather than being notably well-structured.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
With no output schema and no annotations, the description responsibly states the primary return content (author details plus publications). The gap is that it does not mention that the publication list is paged, even though the schema exposes a page parameter.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so both author_id and page are already documented in the schema. The description only restates that the ID is numeric, adding no semantics beyond the schema, which is the baseline-3 case.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
States a specific verb (Retrieve) and resource (author) with a clear scoping constraint (by their numeric ID), which implicitly separates it from the sibling list_authors. It does not explicitly name the sibling it contrasts with, so it falls just short of a 5.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The phrase 'a specific author by their numeric ID' implies this is the single-entity lookup as opposed to list_authors, but no when-to-use condition, prerequisite, or alternative is stated. Usage is inferred rather than guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.