@hanoak/unsplash-mcp-server

Unsplash User Collections

unsplash_user_collections

Read-only

List a user's Unsplash collections with pagination. Supply a username to browse curated photo groups using page and per_page parameters.

Instructions

List a user's collections (paginated). Read-only.

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": {
      "username": "<username>"
    },
    "name": "unsplash_user_collections"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number, 1-based.
`per_page`	No	Items per page (clamped to a max of 30).
`username`	Yes	The Unsplash username (without the @).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Addedv1.2.1Aug 24, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The annotation already declares readOnlyHint=true, so the 'Read-only' phrase in the description is redundant. However, the description does clarify the paginated nature and the user-scoped resource, which adds modest behavioral context beyond the annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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 exceptionally compact: two short phrases front-load the core action and scope with no fluff. The only slight redundancy is 'Read-only', which duplicates annotation data, but the overall structure is still efficient.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple read-only list with fully documented parameters, the description is minimally viable. However, there is no output schema and the description doesn't describe what a returned collection object looks like or direct the agent on how to compare with the broader sibling list tool, leaving moderate gaps for an agent deciding whether this tool is the right one.

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 coverage is 100%, so username, page, and per_page are each fully documented with types, defaults, and constraints. The description adds no extra parameter-level meaning; it just says 'a user's collections', which largely reflects the username parameter.

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 states a clear specific action ('List') and resource ('a user's collections'), and adds 'paginated' to convey the operation's shape. It is distinguishable from other user-level tools like unsplash_user_photos, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative or contrast with the more general list_collections.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer this over unsplash_list_collections, unsplash_search_collections, or unsplash_user_photos. Saying 'a user's collections' implies user-scoped listing, but no explicit conditions, exclusions, or sibling routing are provided.

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