[Sell/Shared] Fetch one TikTok US Shop ProductRecord by id (image.url, price.*, tracked clickUrl). Also: GET /api/public/tiktok-products/:id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | Product id from search_tiktok_products. |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the scope ('TikTok US Shop') and hints at read-only behavior via 'Fetch', and lists returned fields (image.url, price.*, tracked clickUrl). However, it does not detail edge cases, auth requirements, or error behavior, which would enrich transparency.
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 two concise sentences that front-load the core function. The bracket prefix and HTTP endpoint are minor additional details that do not detract from clarity or add unnecessary fluff.
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?
For a simple single-parameter fetch, the description provides enough to understand the operation and gives a hint of the return shape via listed fields. However, the lack of an output schema and absence of error handling mentions leave some minor gaps, preventing a perfect score.
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% with the description 'Product id from search_tiktok_products.' The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 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 uses the specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the resource as 'TikTok US Shop ProductRecord' with a unique id. It clearly distinguishes from the sibling search_tiktok_products by focusing on retrieving a single record by id, and even lists key fields returned.
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 description and parameter schema together imply the tool is used after search_tiktok_products, since the id is stated to come from there. This provides clear context for when to use it, though it doesn't explicitly state exclusions or alternative scenarios.
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.
Multiple tools have overlapping or misleading purposes: buy_campaign and buy_placement are aliases of create_campaign, list_placement actually creates a placement, and get_attribution/get_campaign both provide campaign stats. The report_* tools are distinct but similarly named, increasing selection risk.
Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern, but there are notable deviations: buy_campaign/buy_placement use 'buy' instead of 'create', list_placement is a creator not a lister, and simple nouns like 'wallet' and 'whoami' break the convention.
At 31 tools, the server feels heavy. Several tools are redundant aliases (buy_campaign, buy_placement) or could be consolidated (multiple report_* and list_* variants), making the surface unnecessarily large for the ad marketplace domain.
The core lifecycle is covered: campaign/placement creation, delivery, reporting, attribution, refunds, and cashouts. However, there are gaps like no update_campaign, no true list_placements, and no get_placement, leaving some workflows incomplete.
