Retrieve Threads profile details including username, bio, and picture for a specified user ID or the default account.
Fetch profile details, username, bio, and picture for Threads account @in.yogeshwar (ID: 2072594220036802).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| user_id | No | Optional Threads User ID (defaults to configured THREADS_USER_ID or "me"). |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Fetch' implies read-only and it enumerates the returned fields (username, bio, picture), which is useful, but it says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, or whether the hardcoded ID overrides the user_id parameter.
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 efficient sentence with the resource front-loaded. The embedded account handle and numeric ID add tokens that arguably belong in a config default rather than the description.
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?
For a one-parameter read tool with no output schema, listing the returned fields is reasonable coverage. However, no annotations plus the hardcoded account leaves ambiguity about whether this is a general profile lookup or a single-account helper.
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 coverage is 100% and the single parameter is fully documented there (optional, defaults to THREADS_USER_ID or 'me'). The description never mentions user_id and instead hardcodes one ID, which may lead an agent to believe the tool cannot target other accounts — a mild step backwards from the schema.
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?
Specific verb (Fetch) plus resource (Threads profile details, username, bio, picture), and the platform qualifier distinguishes it from siblings like get_instagram_profile and get_page_profile. The hardcoded '@in.yogeshwar (ID: 2072594220036802)' makes it read as bound to one account, which muddies the scope slightly.
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?
No statement of when to use this versus get_user_profile, get_instagram_profile, or get_page_profile, and no mention that the user_id parameter can target other accounts. Usage has to be inferred from the platform name alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.