USCardForum MCP Server

get_user_summary

Fetch a user's profile summary to evaluate credibility, identify valuable contributions, and understand participation level on USCardForum.

Instructions

Fetch a comprehensive summary of a user's profile.

Args:
    username: The user's handle (case-insensitive)

Returns a UserSummary object with:
- user_id: User ID
- username: Username
- stats: UserStats with posts, topics, likes given/received, etc.
- badges: List of recent Badge objects
- top_topics: Most successful topics
- top_replies: Most successful replies

Use this to:
- Evaluate a user's credibility and experience
- Find their most valuable contributions
- Understand their participation level

The summary provides a quick overview without fetching
individual post histories.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`username`	Yes	The user's handle (case-insensitive)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`name`	No	Display name
`stats`	No	User statistics
`badges`	No	Recent badges
`user_id`	No	User ID
`username`	No	Username
`created_at`	No	Account creation date
`top_topics`	No	Top topics
`top_replies`	No	Top replies
`last_seen_at`	No	Last seen online

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedDec 30, 2025

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by explaining what the tool returns (UserSummary object structure) and its behavioral characteristics (provides quick overview, case-insensitive username handling). It doesn't mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or error conditions, keeping it from a perfect score.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections (Args, Returns, Use cases) and efficient sentences. Slightly verbose with the detailed return structure listing that could be inferred from output schema, but overall earns its place with helpful guidance.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (though not shown here, context signals indicate it exists), the description provides excellent contextual completeness by explaining the tool's purpose, usage scenarios, and behavioral characteristics without needing to duplicate return value documentation.

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% with the parameter already documented in the schema. The description repeats the parameter documentation verbatim ('username: The user's handle (case-insensitive)') without adding meaningful semantic context beyond what's in the schema, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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's purpose with specific verb ('Fetch') and resource ('comprehensive summary of a user's profile'), distinguishing it from siblings like get_user_badges or get_user_topics by emphasizing it provides a holistic overview rather than specific components.

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 states when to use this tool ('Use this to: Evaluate a user's credibility... Find their most valuable contributions... Understand their participation level') and when not to use it ('without fetching individual post histories'), providing clear alternatives to more granular sibling tools.

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