naija-faker-mcp

Generate fake people

generate_people

Read-only

Generate synthetic Nigerian people records with names, addresses, and more. Set a count or seed for controlled test data.

Instructions

Generates an array of basic composite synthetic person records. Accepts an optional positive count and returns 10 records by default.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`seed`	No	Seed for reproducible output; the same seed returns the same record
`count`	No	The number of people to generate

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`items`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv2.1.0Sep 23, 2026

addedInput schema / properties / seed

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Seed for reproducible output; the same seed returns the same record",
+  "maximum": 9007199254740991,
+  "minimum": -9007199254740991,
+  "type": "integer"
+}

Changed5 schema fields changedv2.0.0Sep 16, 2026

changedInput schema / properties / count / description

Previous value: -"The number of persons to be generated as part of the people list"New value: +"The number of people to generate"

addedInput schema / properties / count / maximum
```
Added value: +9007199254740991
```
addedInput schema / properties / count / minimum
```
Added value: +1
```

changedInput schema / properties / count / type

Previous value: -"number"New value: +"integer"

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+  "additionalProperties": false,
+  "properties": {
+    "items": {
+      "items": {
+        "additionalProperties": false,
+        "properties": {
+          "address": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "email": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "firstName": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "fullName": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "lastName": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "phone": {
+            "type": "string"
+          },
+          "title": {
+            "type": "string"
+          }
+        },
+        "required": [
+          "title",
+          "firstName",
+          "lastName",
+          "fullName",
+          "email",
+          "phone",
+          "address"
+        ],
+        "type": "object"
+      },
+      "type": "array"
+    }
+  },
+  "required": [
+    "items"
+  ],
+  "type": "object"
+}

First observedv1.0.1Sep 13, 2026

TDQS

A3.9/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: it returns 10 records by default and accepts an optional positive count. This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then provides only the essential behavioral details. Every part earns its place with no redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present, an annotations block, and full parameter documentation, the description covers the main operational facts: what is produced, in what form, and the default volume. A minor gap is the lack of explicit differentiation from the many similar generation siblings, but the 'basic' qualifier partially compensates.

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?

The schema already documents both parameters fully (100% coverage), giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaning by stating the default count of 10 when count is omitted and clarifying that count is optional.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Generates an array of basic composite synthetic person records.' The 'basic composite' qualifier gives some distinction from siblings like generate_detailed_people, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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 implies when to use the tool through the words 'basic composite' and the plural array behavior, but it never explicitly states when to choose this over generate_person, generate_detailed_people, or generate_consistent_people. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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