Download Xiaohongshu videos directly from a note URL. Provide the link to retrieve the video file for offline viewing or further processing.
根据笔记链接下载小红书视频
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | 小红书笔记链接 |
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 burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the download action and leaves important behavior undisclosed, such as whether it returns a direct video URL, saves a file, or fails on non-video notes. This is a significant gap for an operation that could have side effects or output ambiguities.
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?
The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It efficiently communicates the core purpose, and every word earns its place.
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 annotations and no output schema, the description must explain what happens when the tool runs, but it does not mention the return format, possible failure modes, or any limitations such as requiring a specific note type. A simple downloader still needs enough context for an agent to use the result correctly, which is missing here.
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 100%, and the schema already describes the only parameter as '小红书笔记链接'. The description repeats that notion without adding format constraints, validation rules, or examples, so it adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond the schema.
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 clearly states a specific verb ('下载') and resource ('小红书视频'), and specifies the input as a note link. It is distinct from siblings like xiaohongshu-note-analyzer and xiaohongshu-crawler by naming the download action, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with those alternatives.
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 description implies when to use this tool: when you have a Xiaohongshu note link and want to download its video. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which alternative to choose among the many sibling downloaders and Xiaohongshu tools.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.