Find Douyin accounts similar to a target account by providing its ID or name. Use this tool to discover comparable accounts for competitive analysis or benchmarking.
查询抖音相似账号，根据账号ID或名称匹配对标账号
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| accountId | No | 抖音账号ID | |
| accountName | No | 抖音账号名称 |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
v1.0.4Does 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 only says '查询' (query), implying a read operation, but doesn't disclose output format, whether a list/ranking is returned, data source, or any constraints such as requiring at least one parameter. This is thinner than expected for an annotation-free tool.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence: the core purpose comes first, followed directly by the matching criteria. There is no redundant or filler content.
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 simple two-parameter query tool with no output schema, the description is mostly adequate, but it leaves a practical gap: because both parameters are optional, it doesn't say whether at least one must be supplied or what happens if neither is provided. The return content is only vaguely described as '对标账号'.
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?
Both parameters are already documented in the schema with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds the useful nuance that accountId or accountName can be used to match, but adds no detail about precedence, required-at-least-one, or how the values are interpreted.
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 begins with '查询抖音相似账号' (query Douyin similar accounts), a specific verb and resource, and then specifies matching criteria '根据账号ID或名称'. Its 'similar account' function is distinct from siblings like douyin-account-diagnosis or douyin-top-account.
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 tool's unique purpose is implied by '相似账号/对标账号', so an agent can infer when to use it, but the description never explicitly states when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. It gives the matching basis (ID or name) but no usage conditions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.