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

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavior beyond annotations: what metrics are included, what the single-account view returns, that new accounts show pending until first scrape, and that the tool is free.

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 reasonably concise and front-loads the returned metrics before covering the single-account variant and pending-status note. It is dense but not wasteful; a small amount of structural separation could make it easier to scan.

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?

For a read-only tool with no output schema, the description gives a useful summary of returned metrics and the richer single-account page contents. It is not fully complete on filtering combinations or pagination behavior, but those are partly covered by the schema and are less critical for correct invocation.

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 77%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description elaborates on account_id mode and date-range scope, but does not add meaning for the other filters such as q, sort, platform, account_ids, cursor, or collection_id beyond what the schema already provides.

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 identifies the resource (tracked creators) and the metrics returned for a date range, plus the single-account page mode. It does not explicitly distinguish this tool from overlapping siblings such as get_account or get_tracking_dashboard, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

It implies usage through 'Pass account_id for one creator's page' and notes pending status for new accounts. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool instead of siblings like get_account or list_tracked_videos, nor any exclusions.

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