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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does an excellent job: it discloses the async nature (returns an operation to poll), the per-action cost of 0.005 USDC via x402, and the side-effect of recording a sample for tiktok_series. It also clarifies authentication nuance (omit cookies if connected via tiktok_connect), which is beyond the schema.

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?

Three sentences, no filler. The first sentence states what it does, the second explains async behavior, and the third covers cost. All information earns its place and is front-loaded.

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 the tool's complexity (async, payment, auth modes, integration with tiktok_series), the description covers all major operational aspects: purpose, return value (operation to poll), cost, and cookie handling. No output schema exists, but the description tells the agent how to follow up, which is sufficient.

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 coverage is 60%, so the description adds meaningful context on top. It explains that cookies should be omitted for a connected account (matching the schema's own note), and that payment is omitted on first call to receive instructions. While country and proxy_session_id lack descriptions, the description's clarification of the tricky parameters elevates it above baseline.

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 the tool scrapes per-post analytics (views, likes, comments, shares) for a TikTok account you control, and also records a sample for tiktok_series. The verb 'scrape' and resource 'per-post analytics' are specific, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tiktok_post or tiktok_connect by focusing on analytics and series integration.

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 gives context on when to use it (for accounts you control) and its relationship to tiktok_series, as well as the async polling pattern via tiktok_operation_status. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools, so it lacks exclusionary guidance.

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