Resolve a TikTok @username to its stable numeric user_id and sec_uid. Cheap utility — call this first when you only have a handle and need an id for other tools.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| expand | No | Return the full untrimmed payload. Default false = compact JSON. | |
| username | Yes | @username (with or without the @) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations are empty, so description carries burden; it mentions 'cheap utility' implying low cost but does not explicitly state read-only or other behaviors.
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?
Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words.
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?
Given simple parameters and no output schema, description covers core behavior and use case. Could mention error handling for unknown usernames, but adequate.
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 coverage is 100%, and description adds minimal nuance beyond what's in schema (e.g., 'with or without @' for username). Baseline 3 is appropriate.
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 clearly states the tool resolves a @username to stable numeric user_id and sec_uid, distinguishing it from sibling tools that likely require an ID.
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?
Explicitly says 'call this first when you only have a handle and need an id for other tools,' providing clear when-to-use guidance.
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.
Each tool targets a distinct data type or action (creator, video, comment, sound, hashtag, search, etc.) with no functional overlap. Agents can easily distinguish them based on their clear entity-action pairing.
All tools follow a 'tiktok_' prefix and a consistent noun-first pattern (e.g., 'tiktok_creator_profile', 'tiktok_video_stats'), but there is a minor inconsistency between 'creator' and 'user' for the same entity (e.g., 'tiktok_user_stories' vs 'tiktok_creator_profile').
At 19 tools, the count is slightly high but justified by the breadth of TikTok's public data surface (profiles, videos, comments, sounds, hashtags, searches, etc.). Each tool serves a specific purpose, and the set feels comprehensive rather than bloated.
The tool set covers most read-only operations for TikTok public data, including profiles, videos, comments, sounds, hashtags, and searches. Missing are direct trending feeds or aggregated analytics, but search capabilities compensate. No create/update/delete exists, which is expected for a data extraction server.