TikTok Shop Scraper [NO COOKIES] ✅

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and non-destructive, and the description reinforces this while adding genuinely new behavior: it starts a run of the Apify Actor through mcp.apify.com, requires the caller's own APIFY_TOKEN, and bills against the caller's Apify account. It also explains the return contract (dataset rows plus run/dataset IDs for paging). It omits run latency and the asynchronous nature of Actor runs, which matters for a scraper that can take minutes.

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-loads the capability, then a 'When to use / Returns / Behavior' block, which is easy to scan. Some of the framing ('Built for dropshippers, e-commerce sellers, and DTC brands hunting trending products before they go viral') is marketing copy that does not help invocation.

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 10-parameter, mode-driven scraper with no output schema, the description covers return shape, execution model, and auth. The main omission is that it never signals expected run duration or polling, and its 'country (US, UK)' claim is incomplete relative to the schema's broader, explicitly unsupported region enum.

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 description advertises filtering by 'category, price range, and country (US, UK)', but the schema has no category or price-range parameters at all, and the region parameter explicitly warns that only US is tested while other markets are unreliable. That directly misleads an agent into setting region=GB, and the parameter details the description does provide are already fully covered by a 100% schema coverage.

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 and resource set: extract product data, reviews, seller info, creator affiliates, and GMV/sales estimates from TikTok Shop. The platform is named explicitly, which cleanly separates it from the Amazon, eBay, and Etsy siblings.

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 'When to use' line enumerates the supported intents (products, reviews, sellers, creator affiliates, GMV estimates) and the input shapes (category, keyword, shop, product URL). It lacks explicit when-not-to-use guidance and never routes the agent to a named alternative, but the context is clear enough to select this tool.

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