@hanoak/unsplash-mcp-server

Unsplash Collection Photos

unsplash_collection_photos

Read-only

Get paginated photos from an Unsplash collection with image URLs and ready-to-use attribution. Filter by orientation and append imgix parameters to raw URLs for custom sizes.

Instructions

List the photos in a collection (paginated), with URLs and ready-to-use attribution. Read-only. Each photo includes a raw imgix base URL — append params for a custom size/format, e.g. ?w=800&h=600&q=80&fm=webp&fit=crop — plus fixed full/regular/small/thumb sizes.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "id": "<id>"
    },
    "name": "unsplash_collection_photos"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`id`	Yes	The Unsplash collection ID.
`page`	No	Page number, 1-based.
`per_page`	No	Items per page (clamped to a max of 30).
`orientation`	No	Filter by photo orientation.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Jul 25, 2026

TDQS

A4.3/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint; the description reinforces 'Read-only' and adds behavioral details: pagination, attribution, and imgix URL customization. No contradictions.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, followed by actionable detail. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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

Completeness5/5

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

For a paginated list tool with 4 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, pagination, return format (URLs, sizes, attribution), and usage of raw URL. It equips the agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds meaningful context about return values (imgix URLs, fixed sizes, attribution) and pagination, going beyond individual parameter descriptions.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool lists photos in a collection, with pagination, URLs, and attribution. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools that focus on users, topics, or stats.

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

Usage Guidelines3/5

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

The description explains what the tool does and how to use the output URLs, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use unsplash_collection_photos vs unsplash_topic_photos). No exclusions or conditions are mentioned.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.