Skip to main content
Glama
hermoso-ai

Hermoso

Official

Check the TikTok account authorization

tiktok_account_status
Read-only

Check if your TikTok account-level authorization is active, revealing granted scopes, missing permissions, and the exact URL to connect. Reports business ID and distinguishes from advertiser-only access.

Instructions

Report whether this brand holds the TikTok ACCOUNT-HOLDER authorization — the SECOND, separate consent on the same TikTok app that the TikTok Ads connection uses. TikTok issues two different grants: the ADVERTISER one (campaigns, budgets, reporting — that is tiktok_ads) and this ACCOUNT one, which is what lets Hermoso read and manage the comments on the brand's own TikTok posts and mint Spark-Ads authorization codes for them. Holding one does NOT give you the other, so a workspace can be fully connected for ads and still answer 'not connected' here — that is a real third state, not a broken session. Reports the state, the TikTok business id every other tool in this family uses, the scopes the grant actually carries, and any scope MISSING from it (TikTok binds scopes at authorize time and never retroactively, so a grant made before a scope was added simply does not have it and only a reconnect fixes that). Connecting is the one step that needs a browser — the reply carries the exact URL to send the user to. Read-only, free.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description goes well beyond that: it discloses the two-grant system, the 'third state' where ads are connected but account is not, the scope-binding behavior (scopes are bound at authorize time and never retroactively), and the fact that connecting requires a browser and the reply carries the URL. This is rich behavioral context that helps the agent understand exactly what the tool does and what to expect. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is a single, dense paragraph. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and then explains the two-grant distinction, the third state, scope behavior, and the connection URL. Every sentence carries meaningful information, but it is verbose. The final sentence 'Read-only, free.' is redundant with the annotations, but not harmful. Overall, it is appropriately structured for the complexity but could be trimmed without losing key details.

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

Completeness5/5

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

Given that the tool has no parameters and no output schema, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It covers what is reported (state, business id, scopes, missing scopes), the logic behind possible disconnection (scope binding), the distinction from advertiser grant, and the browser requirement for connecting. Nothing an agent needs to call this tool correctly is missing, including the key caveat that a 'not connected' result is not an error.

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

Parameters4/5

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

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and since there are no params to describe, the description does not need to add parameter-specific semantics. It does describe the return payload (state, business id, scopes, missing scopes) which is useful context, but that falls under output rather than parameters.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Report whether this brand holds the TikTok ACCOUNT-HOLDER authorization'. It clearly distinguishes this from the ADVERTISER grant, explicitly naming `tiktok_ads` as the other tool. This makes the purpose unmistakable and sets it apart from siblings like tiktok_account or tiktok_creator_info.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description explains when to use this tool: it covers the ACCOUNT-HOLDER authorization, not the ADVERTISER one, and clarifies that a workspace can be fully connected for ads yet answer 'not connected' here. This is an implicit usage guideline. It does not explicitly list alternatives for every scenario, but the distinction from tiktok_ads is clear, and it notes that browser-based connecting generates a URL — a hint for when this tool is called to aid the connection flow.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/hermoso-ai/hermoso'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server