Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
fanfou-mcp

fanfou-mcp

by Anthonyeef
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

search_public_timeline

Search public statuses by keyword to find posts matching your terms. Supports AND and OR queries for combined or alternative keywords.

Instructions

Search public statuses by keyword (supports 'a b' AND and 'a|b' OR).

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "q": "<q>"
    },
    "name": "search_public_timeline"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
qYes
countNo
max_idNo

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.7/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only discloses query operator syntax. It says nothing about auth requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or that this is a read-only lookup, which matters for a tool with a max_id cursor.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

A single tight sentence with the resource up front and the syntax detail in parentheses. Nothing is wasted, though there is little content overall.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, but with no annotations and 0% parameter coverage the definition should still cover pagination (max_id), result limits, and access constraints. Those omissions leave an agent unable to page or scope results reliably.

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

Parameters2/5

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

Schema description coverage is 0% and there are three parameters. The description usefully explains the 'a b' AND / 'a|b' OR syntax for q, but count and max_id are left entirely undocumented in both schema and description, so pagination semantics are lost.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a clear verb and resource ('Search public statuses by keyword') and the 'public' qualifier implicitly separates it from search_user_timeline and public_timeline. It stops short of explicitly naming which sibling to prefer, so it's clear but not fully differentiated.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives (e.g. search_user_timeline for a single account), and no stated prerequisites. Usage is only inferable from the word 'public' in the resource.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools