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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false. The description adds useful field-level context (status, publish error, TikTok AI labels) beyond annotations, but doesn't disclose error handling, permissions, or rate limits.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. The second sentence is dense but adds useful detail about TikTok-specific fields; no wasted words, though the length is near the upper bound for a simple getter.

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?

Given a simple read tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers return fields well. However, it omits any explanation of the postId parameter and doesn't mention error behavior (e.g., if the post is not found).

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 50%: projectId is described, but postId is not. The description adds no meaning about either parameter, failing to compensate for the undocumented postId.

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?

States a specific verb ('Returns') and resource ('one post'), plus extra scope about status and publish error. It clearly implies a single-post retrieval, distinguishing it from list_posts, though it doesn't explicitly name 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?

Usage is implied: call to get details of a single post. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no mention of alternatives like list_posts or get_post_metrics.

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