Skip to main content
Glama
liu-xindi

polylens-bilibili

by liu-xindi
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Hybrid

list_up_videos

Read-only

Retrieve a paginated list of videos uploaded by a specific Bilibili author. Sort by newest, views, or favorites, and filter by keyword.

Instructions

每批最多 40 条。total 是视频总数，带 keyword 时为匹配数。需要登录。

(uploader videos, channel uploads, other videos by this author)

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
jqYes必填的 jq 表达式。输入是本批条目组成的数组，每条字段：title,url,published_at,duration_sec,view_count,danmaku_count,comment_count。体积大、多数任务用不到的字段：url（后续调用其他工具时需要）；特定任务需要时照常使用。分页字段不在输入里；只筛本批，筛完为空时仍以 has_more 判断有无下一批。结果为字符串时原样返回，其他结果编码为表格或 JSON；结果为数组时 jq_count 是其长度。
orderNo排序。newest
cursorNo续取游标：不传从头开始，回传上次返回的 next_cursor 取下一批。
keywordNo按关键词筛选投稿，平台除标题外也会匹配简介等。
author_urlYesUP 主空间链接（其他工具返回的 author_url），或数字 mid。

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countYes
totalYes
authorYes
videosYes
has_moreYes
jq_countNo
elapsed_sNo
author_urlYes
next_cursorNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.1
    • addedInput schema / properties / jq
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "必填的 jq 表达式。输入是本批条目组成的数组，每条字段：title,url,published_at,duration_sec,view_count,danmaku_count,comment_count。体积大、多数任务用不到的字段：url（后续调用其他工具时需要）；特定任务需要时照常使用。分页字段不在输入里；只筛本批，筛完为空时仍以 has_more 判断有无下一批。结果为字符串时原样返回，其他结果编码为表格或 JSON；结果为数组时 jq_count 是其长度。",
+  "title": "Jq",
+  "type": "string"
+}
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "author_url"
-]New value: +[
+  "author_url",
+  "jq"
+]
    • addedOutput schema / properties / jq_count
      Added value: +{
+  "anyOf": [
+    {
+      "type": "integer"
+    },
+    {
+      "type": "null"
+    }
+  ],
+  "default": null,
+  "title": "Jq Count"
+}
  2. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

B3.1/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations cover readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is already known. The description adds genuinely non-obvious behavior: max 40 items per batch, that 'total' means the overall video count but the matched count when a keyword is supplied, and that login is required. That is useful context beyond the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

It is short, but the structure is poor: a trailing keyword-stuffed parenthetical in English and a stray list fragment, with the behavioral facts front-loaded instead of the purpose. Nothing is verbose, yet the ordering and mixed-language fragments cost clarity.

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

Completeness4/5

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

With an output schema present and 100% schema coverage, the description only needs to supply what structured fields cannot: the login requirement, the 40-per-batch cap, and the meaning of the total field. It covers those, so it is close to complete for this tool, though the missing purpose/usage framing is a small gap.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema itself already documents jq, cursor, order, keyword, and author_url in detail, including that keyword matches beyond title. The description's keyword/total note largely restates what the schema says, so the baseline 3 applies.

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

Purpose3/5

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

The tool name and the parenthetical tag list ("uploader videos, channel uploads, other videos by this author") imply the resource, but the description never states a verb+resource sentence like 'list the videos uploaded by a given UP主'. The Chinese text instead leads with batch size and return semantics, so the core purpose is inferable rather than stated.

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

Usage Guidelines2/5

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

"需要登录" gives a prerequisite, but there is no when-to-use guidance and no routing against siblings such as search_videos, get_feed, or get_up_videos-style alternatives. An agent gets no signal about when this is the right tool versus a search or feed tool.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools