Retrieve TikTok trending posts and topics without parameters. Returns itemList for videos, plus hasMore and cursor for paging, enabling trend analysis.
Retrieve TikTok trending posts. Returns the current TikTok trending feed: itemList holds the videos, and hasMore and cursor describe paging. The response also has a trendingTopics field. Takes no parameters.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the response shape (itemList, hasMore, cursor, trendingTopics) but says nothing about authentication, rate limits, geographic scoping, or freshness of the "trending" data.
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?
Front-loaded with the purpose in the first sentence, followed by compact return-field detail. Every sentence adds value, though the trailing field inventory is slightly list-like rather than integrated.
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?
With no output schema, the description appropriately takes on explaining the return payload by naming the key fields. It is largely sufficient for a parameterless read tool, though it omits any caveats about the data's scope or timeliness.
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?
The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case per the rubric. The description confirms this explicitly, leaving no ambiguity about inputs.
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?
States a specific verb+resource ("Retrieve TikTok trending posts"), which is clear and unambiguous. It doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like tiktok_mobile_feed or tiktok_explore, so an agent must infer the distinction from the name alone.
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?
Provides no when-to-use guidance or named alternatives. It notes "Takes no parameters" but never explains when an agent should pick this trending feed over tiktok_mobile_feed, tiktok_explore, or tiktok_mobile_trending_categories.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.