get_creatorRetrieve a known TikTok or Instagram creator by stable ID, origin ID, or username, with an optional bounded list of recent content for lookups.
Read a known creator by a stable ID or username. Recent content is optional and bounded.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| platform | Yes | The detailed catalog lookup currently supports TikTok and Instagram. | |
| selector | Yes | ||
| recent_content_limit | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that recent content retrieval is optional and bounded, but it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or the shape of the response.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. No wasted words, and the optional recent-content behavior is stated compactly.
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?
The tool is a read operation with no output schema, and annotations cover its safety profile. However, the nested selector offers creator_id, origin_id, and username, and the description only mentions ID and username, leaving origin_id and the platform constraint underexplained.
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 description coverage is only 33%, so the description needs to compensate for parameter meaning. It does clarify that the selector can use a stable ID or username and that recent content is optional and bounded, but it omits the origin_id selector variant and does not explain the platform enum.
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 states a specific verb and resource: read a known creator, with scope limited to stable ID or username. The word "known" helps distinguish it from the sibling search_creators tool, though it does not name that alternative explicitly.
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?
Usage is implied: use this when you already have a stable creator ID or username. The description mentions that recent content is optional and bounded, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer get_creator over search_creators or when not to use it.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.