Skip to main content
Glama

captapi

by io.github.CDCStream

pinterest_search

Keyword pin search — offset cursor, SERP window 40. Costs ~13 credits (0.5/result). Empty results and failures are never charged. Pass cache=true for a free 24h cache hit (default always fresh).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYesKeywords or search query (min 2 characters).
cacheNoSet true to serve from the 24h response cache (0 credits on hit). Default false — always fetch fresh.
limitNoMax items to return (default 25, max 200). Billed per result.
cursorNoPagination cursor. Leave empty for the first page; then pass the nextCursor value returned in the previous response (numeric offset, e.g. 25). A null nextCursor means the end of the SERP window (max 40).

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden and does well: it states credit cost (~13 credits), per-result billing, no charge for empty/failed results, the SERP window cap of 40, and cache=true 24h free-cache behavior with fresh-by-default. This is rich behavioral context beyond what the schema provides.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

Three short sentences front-load the core purpose and then pack pricing, caching, pagination, and failure behavior with no filler. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers purpose, pagination, limits, pricing, and caching, so an agent can invoke the tool correctly. It does not describe return result fields, and there is no output schema, but for a search endpoint this is a minor gap rather than a blocking omission.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already documents all four parameters (100% coverage), so the baseline is 3. The description adds the SERP window cap of 40, which qualifies how limit and cursor interact, and clarifies cursor/offset and per-result billing, adding meaningful value beyond the schema.

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 opens with 'Keyword pin search', naming the specific operation (search) and resource (pins). This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like pinterest_user_pins, pinterest_board, and pinterest_pin_details.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description clearly frames the tool as keyword-driven pin search, so an agent can infer it is for discovery by query rather than for fetching a user's pins or board details. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is unambiguous enough.

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

All captapi toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Disambiguation3/5

The platform-prefix convention keeps most of the 178 tools clearly separated, but several clusters are genuinely ambiguous: tiktok_live_info is explicitly described as 'Identical to TikTok Live', instagram_basic_profile and instagram_channel_details both return profile stats, and facebook_profile_posts overlaps with facebook_profile_reels. The generic 'Summarizer' descriptions for facebook_summarize, instagram_summarize, and tiktok_summarize provide no disambiguating detail at all.

Naming Consistency4/5

The dominant snake_case platform_resource_suffix pattern is followed remarkably consistently across 178 tools (e.g. youtube_channel_videos, tiktok_search_users, reddit_subreddit_posts). Minor deviations exist: the same creator resource is called 'channel' in some tools (tiktok_channel_details, instagram_channel_posts) but 'profile' or 'user' in others (facebook_profile_posts, twitch_user_videos, linnkme_profile); link-in-bio tools mostly use _page but linkme uses _profile; and the video_summarize/video_transcript pair lacks a platform prefix.

Tool Count2/5

At 178 tools this is far beyond what any agent can efficiently navigate in a single flat namespace, and even individual platform subsets exceed reasonable bounds (TikTok alone has ~34 tools, YouTube ~25). The sheer breadth of the multi-platform scope partially justifies the count, but the server would be far more usable split into per-platform servers.

Completeness4/5

The read-only data surface is impressively thorough: nearly every platform has profile + content + search + comments coverage, and TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook are covered end-to-end including shops, ads, transcripts, and summaries. Notable gaps are minor: Twitter has no keyword search tool, LinkedIn lacks comments, and Reddit has no user-profile endpoint, but none of these create dead ends for the server's core data-retrieval purpose.

Resources