Skip to main content
Glama

Vee3

by io.github.Vee3io

tiktok.user_reposts

List reposts for a TikTok user. Provide either user_id or unique_id, not both. Pass cursor from a previous response to fetch the next page.

Cost = 3 tokens.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNoNumber of items to return (max 30).
cursorNoPagination cursor from a previous response.
user_idNoTikTok numeric user id.
unique_idNoTikTok unique id (username).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
msgNoUpstream status message.
codeNoUpstream status code (0 = success).
dataNoCapability-specific payload from the upstream provider.
processed_timeNoUpstream processing time in seconds.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • changedOutput schema / properties / processed_time / anyOf
      Previous value: -[
-  {},
-  {
-    "type": "null"
-  }
-]New value: +[
+  {
+    "type": "number"
+  },
+  {
+    "type": "null"
+  }
+]
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.2/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses pagination behavior via cursor and token cost ('Cost = 3 tokens'), which is useful. However, it does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, or any other safety-relevant traits beyond what is already obvious from the read-only nature of listing.

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 highly concise: two sentences and a cost note. Every sentence adds value—purpose, parameter constraints, and pagination—with no redundant or extraneous content.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and full schema parameter descriptions, the description covers the essential usage points: resource, identifier requirements, and pagination. It could arguably mention the count parameter's behavior or potential errors, but those are adequately covered by the schema and output schema.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by specifying the exclusive-or relationship between user_id and unique_id, and by explaining the role of cursor for pagination. This enhances understanding of how the parameters relate.

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 'List reposts for a TikTok user,' which uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('reposts'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like tiktok.user_videos or tiktok.user_followers. It unambiguously states the tool's function.

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 parameter usage guidance: 'Provide either user_id or unique_id, not both' and 'Pass cursor from a previous response to fetch the next page.' It provides practical context for invocation but does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool relative to siblings.

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

All Vee3 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

A4.1/5.0
Disambiguation5/5

Each tool has a distinct purpose, further clarified by group prefixes and clear descriptions. Within each group, tools perform different operations (e.g., domains.lookup vs. domains.whois vs. domains.rdap) with no ambiguity.

Naming Consistency5/5

All tools follow a consistent group.tool_name pattern using snake_case. The naming is predictable and uniformly applied across all groups.

Tool Count4/5

78 tools is high, but the server aggregates multiple distinct API domains (11 groups). Each group has a reasonable number of tools, typically under 10, with TikTok having 17. The count reflects breadth, not bloat.

Completeness5/5

Each domain's tool set covers the primary expected operations (e.g., search, details, reviews, metrics, user info). There are no obvious gaps for read-only analytical use; features like posting are likely out of scope.

Resources