mcp-pinterest-brand-presence-mapper

Map Pinterest Brand Presence

map_pinterest_brand_presence

Idempotent

Resolve a company domain to its Pinterest business account and return exact follower, following, pin, and board counts, claimed website, and verified merchant status for brand presence mapping.

Instructions

Resolve a company domain to its Pinterest business account and return EXACT follower, following, pin and board counts, plus the claimed website, verified merchant status and last pin date, as one flat Clay ready row. Pinterest serves real integers, so these counts can be summed across a list. Board count is a better activity signal than followers for a consumer brand, because boards are curation effort. Pinterest handles are rarely the domain stem, so a guessed account that fails the identity check is reported as identity_mismatch with no counts rather than returning a stranger's numbers. Read only; requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes Apify credits per call.

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`handle`	No	Optional. The Pinterest username from pinterest.com/<handle>. Supplying it skips discovery and, more importantly, skips the identity risk: Pinterest handles are rarely the domain stem.
`skipCache`	No	Default false: a successful lookup is cached for seven days and reused. Set true to force a fresh fetch.
`company_name`	No	Optional. Improves search accuracy and is what the identity gate checks a discovered profile against, so supplying it reduces wrong matches.
`company_domain`	No	Bare company domain, for example shopify.com. Supply this or a handle. With a domain the actor runs full discovery; with a handle it skips straight to the fetch.
`max_charge_usd`	No	Optional spending cap for this call, in USD, passed to the actor as max_charge_usd. The run stops before any charge that would take it past this amount and keeps every row already charged. Leave empty to rely only on the maximum charge per run set on your Apify account.
`includeFollowerCounts`	No	Default true: the profile page is fetched and the follower counts are extracted. Set false to resolve the profile URL only, which is cheaper and needs no proxy.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed4 schema fields changedv1.1.1Oct 16, 2026

removedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Removed value: -false
```

changedInput schema / properties / includeFollowerCounts / description

Previous value: -"When \"true\" (default) the profile page is fetched and the counts are extracted. Set \"false\" to resolve the profile URL only, which is cheaper and needs no proxy. Sent as a string for Clay compatibility."New value: +"Default true: the profile page is fetched and the follower counts are extracted. Set false to resolve the profile URL only, which is cheaper and needs no proxy."

addedInput schema / properties / max_charge_usd

Added value: +{
+  "description": "Optional spending cap for this call, in USD, passed to the actor as max_charge_usd. The run stops before any charge that would take it past this amount and keeps every row already charged. Leave empty to rely only on the maximum charge per run set on your Apify account.",
+  "minimum": 0,
+  "type": "number"
+}

changedInput schema / properties / skipCache / description

Previous value: -"When \"false\" (default) a successful lookup is cached for seven days and reused. Set \"true\" to force a fresh fetch. Sent as a string for Clay compatibility."New value: +"Default false: a successful lookup is cached for seven days and reused. Set true to force a fresh fetch."

First observedv1.0.0Aug 23, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

The annotations already declare openWorldHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds genuinely new behavioral facts: the paid-credit cost per call, the required APIFY_TOKEN, the identity-gate failure mode (identity_mismatch with no counts instead of a stranger's numbers), and that counts are real integers that can be summed. The 'Read only' phrasing sits in mild tension with readOnlyHint=false, but the description immediately qualifies it by disclosing the credit spend and external actor execution, which is the actual reason the tool is not flagged read-only.

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?

Four dense sentences, front-loaded with the outcome and followed by interpretation, failure semantics, and cost/auth. The 'boards are curation effort' sentence is arguably interpretive filler for a parameter-oriented reader, but it earns its place by telling the agent how to weight the returned fields.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries the full burden and delivers: it enumerates the returned fields, the flat single-row shape, the caching behavior (in schema), the failure mode, the auth prerequisite, and the cost model. An agent has everything needed to call this correctly and to interpret the result.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds interpretive value the schema does not: it explains why handle is more than a convenience (it skips the identity risk because Pinterest handles rarely match the domain stem) and why company_name reduces wrong matches via the identity gate. That rationale goes beyond the per-parameter text.

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 pair — 'Resolve a company domain to its Pinterest business account' — and then enumerates the exact return payload (follower, following, pin, board counts, claimed website, merchant status, last pin date). There are no sibling tools, but the scope is still unmistakable from the first clause alone.

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?

It states the operating conditions clearly: domain vs. handle selects discovery vs. direct fetch, handle presence skips identity risk, and the call requires an APIFY_TOKEN and consumes credits. It does not state an explicit 'do not use this when…' case, but with no siblings to disambiguate against, the context is adequate rather than exhaustive.

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

map_pinterest_brand_presenceA