Skip to main content
Glama

SocialDataX TikTok MCP

by com.52choujiang
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

tiktok_get_user_info_by_tiktok_id

Read-only

根据 TikTok 号获取用户公开资料。

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
tiktok_idYes非空 TikTok 号，即用户主页 @ 后的标识；可使用用户搜索结果中的 TikTok 号，也可使用其他搜索、详情、评论或评论回复结果中 author.tiktok_id 的值；不要带 @，不要传用户主页链接

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
bioYes用户简介；当前不可用时为空字符串
nameYes用户昵称；当前不可用时为空字符串
pointsYes本次成功调用的积分消耗与调用完成时的账户积分余额。
user_idYesTikTok 用户 ID；长数字字符串，原样保留，不要转为数字；当前不可用时为空字符串；不要用它代替 tiktok_id 或 profile_url
verifiedYes用户是否为认证账号
tiktok_idYesTikTok 号，即用户主页 @ 后的标识；当前不可用时为空字符串，为空时不要作为用户标识使用
avatar_urlYes用户头像链接；当前不可用时为 null
profile_urlYes用户主页链接；当前不可用时为 null
follower_countYes粉丝数；当前不可用时为 null
following_countYes关注数；当前不可用时为 null
private_accountYes用户账号是否为私密账号
received_like_countYes用户作品累计获赞数；当前不可用时为 null
posted_content_countYes用户已发布作品数；当前不可用时为 null

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / tiktok_id / description
      Previous value: -"TikTok 号，即用户主页 @ 后的标识；可直接使用搜索、详情、评论或评论回复结果中 author.tiktok_id 的值；不要带 @，不要传用户主页链接"New value: +"非空 TikTok 号，即用户主页 @ 后的标识；可使用用户搜索结果中的 TikTok 号，也可使用其他搜索、详情、评论或评论回复结果中 author.tiktok_id 的值；不要带 @，不要传用户主页链接"
    • addedInput schema / properties / tiktok_id / minLength
      Added value: +1
    • addedInput schema / properties / tiktok_id / pattern
      Added value: +".*\\S.*"
  2. First observed

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

readOnlyHint and openWorldHint already declare the safety profile, so the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing beyond that — no mention of rate limits, authentication, or what "公开资料" covers. The phrase 公开资料 is consistent with the annotations but adds no new behavioral detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

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

A single short sentence with zero filler is appropriately sized and front-loaded, but it is terse to the point of under-specification rather than efficiently dense.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-parameter read tool with a rich schema, output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers the minimum needed to invoke it. The missing piece is disambiguation from the sibling profile-URL lookup, which leaves the definition merely adequate.

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?

Only one parameter, and the schema documents it exhaustively (non-empty, no @, no profile URL, acceptable sources). The description contributes no formatting or source guidance beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource (获取用户公开资料) plus the lookup key (TikTok 号), which is enough to distinguish it from search- or post-oriented siblings. It stops short of naming the nearest alternative, tiktok_get_user_info_by_profile_url, so the read-vs-read ambiguity between the two lookup tools remains.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the profile-URL variant or search_users, and no prerequisites or exclusions. An agent must infer the choice from the parameter name alone.

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

All SocialDataX TikTok MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources