Skip to main content
Glama

mediawiki_get_user_contributions

Read-onlyIdempotent

Retrieve all edits made by a specific user, with optional time range and namespace filters, returning timestamps and edit summaries.

Instructions

Get all edits made by a specific user.

USE WHEN: User asks "what did John edit", "show user's contributions", "list edits by admin".

NOT FOR: Page-specific history (use mediawiki_get_revisions). Not for wiki-wide activity (use mediawiki_get_recent_changes).

PARAMETERS:

  • user: Username (required)

  • limit: Max contributions (default 50)

  • start, end: Time range (ISO 8601)

  • namespace: Filter by namespace

RETURNS: List of pages edited with timestamps and summaries.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rationaleNoOptional one-sentence explanation of why you are calling this tool. Used for audit trails when present.
userYesUsername to get contributions for
limitNoMax contributions to return (default 50, max 500)
namespaceNoFilter by namespace (-1 for all)
startNoStart from this timestamp (ISO 8601, newer first)
endNoEnd at this timestamp (ISO 8601)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
userYes
contributionsYes
countYes
has_moreYes
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. Description adds return format details (list of pages with timestamps and summaries) beyond 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?

Well-structured with clear sections (main, USE WHEN, NOT FOR, PARAMETERS, RETURNS). Every sentence is informative; no redundancy.

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?

With output schema present, description adequately covers return values. All parameters documented, usage guidance provided, and behavioral notes sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters5/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, and description's PARAMETERS section adds defaults (limit 50), format constraints (ISO 8601), and purpose of each parameter, complementing schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Get all edits made by a specific user' with specific verb and resource. Explicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like mediawiki_get_revisions and mediawiki_get_recent_changes.

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?

Includes 'USE WHEN' examples and 'NOT FOR' section with explicit alternative tool names, providing clear context for tool selection.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/olgasafonova/mediawiki-mcp-server'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server