Skip to main content
Glama

captapi

by io.github.CDCStream

tiktok_channel_details

Resolve a TikTok @handle to id + secUid — createTime, ttSeller, bioLink, decoded privacy flags. Costs 1 credit. Empty results and failures are never charged. Pass cache=true for a free 24h cache hit (default always fresh).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
rawNoSet true to include TikTok's upstream user/statsV2 blob under raw, plus createTimeUnix (unix twin of createTime). Default false — curated fields only.
urlYesTikTok profile URL, @handle, or username, e.g. https://tiktok.com/@username. Not a YouTube channel URL. The URL platform must match this endpoint's platform. Do not pass cross-platform URLs, e.g. YouTube to TikTok, Instagram to Facebook, LinkedIn to X/Twitter, or Pinterest to Rumble.
cacheNoSet true to serve from the response cache (default TTL). Default false — always fetch fresh. Prefer cacheMaxAge when you need 1d–30d freshness control.
cacheMaxAgeNoMax age of a cached response: 1d, 3d, 7d, 14d, or 30d. When set, enables caching with that TTL.

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior4/5

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 does so well by stating the credit cost, the no-charge policy for empty results/failures, the free cache-hit behavior, and the default fresh-fetch behavior. It does not cover rate limits or error response details, but the key operational behaviors are disclosed.

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?

The description is two tight sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the credit/cache caveats are packed into the second sentence without redundancy. Every clause 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 is reasonably complete for a metadata-resolution tool: it names the output fields, input formats, platform-matching constraint, cost model, and caching behavior. There is no output schema, so listing return fields is valuable. It could mention error cases or rate limits, but for this tool's complexity the description covers the essential context.

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 baseline is 3 and the description need not re-explain parameters. It does add marginal value by clarifying that cache=true yields a free 24h hit and by stating the credit implication, which goes slightly beyond the schema's 'default TTL' wording. That is useful but not a substantial parameter-semantic contribution.

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 a specific verb ('Resolve') and a precise resource ('a TikTok @handle to id + secUid'), then lists the returned fields. This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like tiktok_channel_posts or tiktok_search_users by framing it as an ID/metadata resolver rather than a content or search tool.

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 gives clear context for when the tool is appropriate: resolving TikTok handles to IDs and account metadata. It also provides explicit exclusions ('Not a YouTube channel URL', 'Do not pass cross-platform URLs'), which help an agent avoid misuse. It does not name sibling alternatives explicitly, so it misses the top bar for this dimension.

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