get_getVideoGet tiktok video full info. HD Quality, No Watermark. Fast. Support Tiktok & Douyin. Support Getting Image List. Support Tiktok Stories. Billing per call: 1 Credits.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| hd | No | Get HD Video(High bit rate). This increases the total request time a little. response: data.hdplay | |
| url | No | 7106658991907802411 or https://www.tiktok.com/@tiktok/video/7106658991907802411 |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose billing (1 credit per call), supported platforms (Tiktok & Douyin), and output traits (HD quality, no watermark, fast). However, it omits rate limits, authentication needs, error behavior, response format, and limitations—partial transparency only.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is appropriately short and front-loaded with the main purpose. The fragmented style (e.g., 'Fast. Support Tiktok & Douyin.') is slightly choppy, and 'Fast' is a vague marketing word, but every line otherwise adds useful capability or cost information.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
There is no output schema, yet the description does not explain what the returned data contains beyond 'full info' and vague mentions of HD/no watermark and image lists. An agent cannot predict the response structure, error handling, or edge-case behavior. For a tool with no annotations or output schema, this is under-specified.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already fully documented (URL formats and HD bit-rate behavior). The description adds some context by mentioning HD quality and no watermark, but it does not materially enhance understanding of the input parameters beyond what the schema describes.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Get tiktok video full info'—immediately clear this tool retrieves complete TikTok video data. The added capabilities (HD, no watermark, image lists, stories, Tiktok & Douyin) further distinguish it from sibling tools focused on challenges, comments, music, users, etc.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
The usage is implied by the description and name: use this when you need TikTok (or Douyin) video information, images, or stories. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over sibling tools such as get_userPublishVideo or get_musicVideo, and no exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Tools are grouped by domain (Challenge, Comment, Feed, Mix, Music, User) with clear resource-action pairs. Some potential confusion exists between get_feedList and get_feedSearch, and between get_mixList and get_mixPosts, but descriptions clarify their distinct purposes.
All tools follow a consistent get_<resource><Action> pattern, with camelCase for the action part (e.g., get_challengeInfo, get_userFavoriteVideo). Minor inconsistency: get_getVideo has a redundant 'get' prefix, and get_regionList lacks a clear action verb, but overall the pattern is predictable.
19 tools is slightly above the ideal range but justified for a comprehensive TikTok API covering multiple resource types (challenges, comments, feeds, mixes, music, users). Each tool serves a distinct data retrieval purpose, so the count feels appropriate for the scope.
The tool surface covers read operations across major TikTok entities (videos, users, challenges, music, playlists, comments) but lacks write operations (post, like, follow) and some advanced features like video download or story-specific endpoints. For a download-focused server, the absence of a direct download tool is notable, though get_getVideo provides full info.