whitney-museum-mcp-server

List an artist's artworks

whitney_artist_artworks

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve paginated artworks by a specific artist ID, outputting markdown or JSON. Matches artist record to correctly include collaborative and attributed works.

Instructions

List the collection works by one artist.

Args:

id (string): artist ID
page (number, default 1), limit (number, 1-30, default 10)
response_format ('markdown' | 'json', default 'markdown')

Returns: { total, count, page, has_more, next_page?, results[] } with slim artwork records.

Use this rather than whitney_search_artworks with an artist name — it matches on the artist record rather than the credit line, so collaborative and attributed works are handled correctly.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`id`	Yes	Artist ID — a TMS ID like '962', or an internal reference prefixed with 'T'
`page`	No	1-based page number; the API returns 30 records per page
`limit`	No	Maximum records to return from the fetched page (1-30). Keep this low unless you need the detail — Whitney records are verbose.
`response_format`	No	Output format: 'markdown' for reading, 'json' for machine processing	markdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No	Advisory note about trimming or pagination
`page`	Yes	Page that was fetched
`count`	Yes	Records returned in this response
`total`	Yes	Total matching records across all pages
`source`	Yes	Attribution for the data, as the Whitney's terms ask for
`results`	Yes	The records
`has_more`	Yes	Whether further pages exist
`next_page`	No	Page number to request next

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.0Aug 26, 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, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the return shape (total, count, page, has_more, next_page?, results[]) and mentions 'slim artwork records', which provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotations. 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.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes an args summary and a returns line, and the usage guidance is appended at the end. While the args section duplicates schema info, the overall structure is efficient and free of fluff.

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?

For a read-only list operation with rich annotations, the description covers the core need: it states what it returns, how pagination works, when to use it over a sibling, and parameter defaults. It lacks explicit error-handling or rate-limit notes, but these are not essential here. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to call it correctly.

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% and each parameter already has a detailed description in the schema. The description's 'Args:' section simply repeats the parameter names and defaults without adding new meaning. The only addition, the limit hint about verbose records, is already present in the schema. Hence baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'collection works by one artist', and explicitly differentiates from the sibling whitney_search_artworks by explaining the matching mechanism. This gives an agent a precise understanding of what the tool does and how it differs from alternatives.

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

Usage Guidelines5/5

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

It explicitly says 'Use this rather than whitney_search_artworks with an artist name' and spells out the reason (matches on artist record vs credit line) and the benefit (handles collaborative and attributed works correctly). This is a clear, actionable usage guideline with an alternative and a scenario.

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

Deploy Server