Skip to main content
Glama
mildlydiverting

whitney-museum-mcp-server

Search Whitney artists

whitney_search_artists
Read-onlyIdempotent

Search the Whitney Museum's 7,000+ listed artists by name, collection status, biennial participation, or on-view availability. Returns slim artist records for further research.

Instructions

Search the 7,000+ artists listed by the Whitney — those with work in the collection and those who have appeared in Museum exhibitions.

Returns slim records (id, name, dates, in_collection, in_biennial, on_view). Call whitney_get_artist for the biography and authority IDs.

Args:

  • name (string, optional): substring match on the display name

  • in_collection, in_biennial, on_view (boolean, optional)

  • sort ('default' | 'name_asc' | 'name_desc' | 'most_viewed' | 'random')

  • 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[], note? }

Example: "which O'Keeffes are in the collection?" -> search name="O'Keeffe", then whitney_artist_artworks with the returned id.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
nameNoWords appearing in the artist's display name
pageNo1-based page number; the API returns 30 records per page
sortNoResult orderingdefault
limitNoMaximum records to return from the fetched page (1-30). Keep this low unless you need the detail — Whitney records are verbose.
on_viewNoRestrict to artists with work currently on view
in_biennialNoRestrict to artists who have shown in a Whitney Biennial
in_collectionNoRestrict to artists with work in the collection
response_formatNoOutput format: 'markdown' for reading, 'json' for machine processingmarkdown

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
noteNoAdvisory note about trimming or pagination
pageYesPage that was fetched
countYesRecords returned in this response
totalYesTotal matching records across all pages
sourceYesAttribution for the data, as the Whitney's terms ask for
resultsYesThe records
has_moreYesWhether further pages exist
next_pageNoPage number to request next

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

A4.4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context on the return shape (slim records, total/count/page/has_more/next_page) and scope, which goes beyond the annotations without repeating them.

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 well-structured and front-loaded: purpose, return shape, parameters, return object, and example. Some redundancy exists with the schema in the Args list, but the example and explicit alternatives earn their place, keeping the overall size reasonable.

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 search tool with 8 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is complete: it lists all parameters, describes the return object, provides a realistic example, and directs to related tools. No critical information for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the input schema fully documents each parameter. The description's Args section largely restates the schema but adds a bit of usage context in the example and mentions the record structure. 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 tool searches 7,000+ Whitney artists with a specific scope (collection and exhibitions) and distinguishes itself from related tools by mentioning slim records versus the biography-focused whitney_get_artist. The verb 'Search' and resource 'artists' are immediately clear.

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?

The description explicitly routes to whitney_get_artist for biography and authority IDs, and the example provides a concrete workflow of when to search artists and then call whitney_artist_artworks. This gives clear guidance on alternatives and next steps.

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