Skip to main content
Glama
rhettlong

USCardForum MCP Server

by rhettlong

get_user_actions

Retrieve a user's activity feed from USCardForum with filtering options for likes, posts, topics, replies, and mentions to analyze detailed engagement patterns.

Instructions

Fetch a user's activity feed with optional filtering.

Args:
    username: The user's handle
    filter: Action type filter (optional). Common values:
        - 1: Likes given
        - 2: Likes received
        - 4: Topics created
        - 5: Replies posted
        - 6: Posts (all)
        - 7: Mentions
    offset: Pagination offset (0, 30, 60, ...)

Returns a list of UserAction objects showing what the user has done.

Use this for detailed activity analysis beyond just replies.
For most cases, get_user_replies or get_user_topics are simpler.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
usernameYesThe user's handle
filterNoAction type filter: 1=likes given, 2=likes received, 4=topics created, 5=replies posted, 6=all posts, 7=mentions
offsetNoPagination offset (0, 30, 60, ...)

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Implementation Reference

  • The primary MCP tool handler for 'get_user_actions'. Decorated with @mcp.tool(), defines input schema via Annotated Fields, includes comprehensive docstring, and implements logic by calling the underlying API client.
    @mcp.tool()
    def get_user_actions(
        username: Annotated[
            str,
            Field(description="The user's handle"),
        ],
        filter: Annotated[
            int | None,
            Field(
                default=None,
                description="Action type filter: 1=likes given, 2=likes received, 4=topics created, 5=replies posted, 6=all posts, 7=mentions",
            ),
        ] = None,
        offset: Annotated[
            int | None,
            Field(default=None, description="Pagination offset (0, 30, 60, ...)"),
        ] = None,
    ) -> list[UserAction]:
        """
        Fetch a user's activity feed with optional filtering.
    
        Args:
            username: The user's handle
            filter: Action type filter (optional). Common values:
                - 1: Likes given
                - 2: Likes received
                - 4: Topics created
                - 5: Replies posted
                - 6: Posts (all)
                - 7: Mentions
            offset: Pagination offset (0, 30, 60, ...)
    
        Returns a list of UserAction objects showing what the user has done.
    
        Use this for detailed activity analysis beyond just replies.
        For most cases, get_user_replies or get_user_topics are simpler.
        """
        return get_client().get_user_actions(username, filter=filter, offset=offset)
  • Pydantic BaseModel defining the UserAction type, which is the output type for the tool (list[UserAction]). Specifies fields and descriptions for user activity data.
    class UserAction(BaseModel):
        """A user activity entry (reply, like, etc.)."""
    
        action_type: int | None = Field(None, description="Type of action")
        topic_id: int | None = Field(None, description="Related topic ID")
        post_number: int | None = Field(None, description="Related post number")
        title: str | None = Field(None, description="Topic title")
        excerpt: str | None = Field(None, description="Content preview")
        created_at: datetime | None = Field(None, description="When action occurred")
        username: str | None = Field(None, description="Username who performed action")
        acting_username: str | None = Field(None, description="Acting user")
    
        class Config:
            extra = "ignore"
  • Package-level import and re-export of the get_user_actions tool from the users submodule, grouping it with other user-related MCP tools.
    from .users import (
        get_user_summary,
        get_user_topics,
        get_user_replies,
        get_user_actions,
        get_user_badges,
        get_user_following,
        get_user_followers,
        get_user_reactions,
        list_users_with_badge,
    )
  • Imports all MCP tools including get_user_actions into the main FastMCP server entrypoint, making them available for automatic registration via decorators.
    from uscardforum.server_tools import (
        analyze_user,
        bookmark_post,
        compare_cards,
        find_data_points,
        get_all_topic_posts,
        get_categories,
        get_current_session,
        get_hot_topics,
        get_new_topics,
        get_notifications,
        get_top_topics,
        get_topic_info,
        get_topic_posts,
        get_user_actions,
        get_user_badges,
        get_user_followers,
        get_user_following,
        get_user_reactions,
        get_user_replies,
        get_user_summary,
        get_user_topics,
        list_users_with_badge,
        login,
        research_topic,
        resource_categories,
        resource_hot_topics,
        resource_new_topics,
        search_forum,
        subscribe_topic,
    )
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool returns 'a list of UserAction objects' and describes pagination behavior via the offset parameter, but doesn't cover important aspects like rate limits, authentication requirements, error conditions, or what happens when username doesn't exist. It adds some context but leaves gaps for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 with clear sections (purpose, args, returns, usage guidance) and every sentence adds value. It could be slightly more concise by avoiding repetition of filter values that are already in the schema, but overall it's efficiently organized and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

Given that there's an output schema (returns UserAction objects), the description doesn't need to explain return values. It covers the tool's purpose, parameters, and usage context adequately. The main gap is the lack of behavioral details that would normally come from annotations (auth, rate limits, errors), but the description provides sufficient context for basic usage given the output schema exists.

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 schema already fully documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema - it repeats the filter mapping (1=likes given, etc.) and offset explanation, but doesn't provide additional semantic context like parameter interactions or edge cases. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('user's activity feed'), and distinguishes it from siblings by mentioning 'detailed activity analysis beyond just replies.' It explicitly names alternatives (get_user_replies, get_user_topics), showing clear differentiation.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool ('for detailed activity analysis beyond just replies') and when to use alternatives ('For most cases, get_user_replies or get_user_topics are simpler'). This gives clear context for tool selection versus sibling tools.

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/rhettlong/uscardforum-mcp'

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