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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only that the data is public ('公开资料'), but does not discuss auth needs, rate limits, or other behavioral traits. This is acceptable for a simple read-only lookup, but adds little 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.

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

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence: it names the action, the resource, and the lookup key in a compact form. There is no filler, and the sentence is immediately informative.

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?

This is a one-parameter, read-only lookup with a rich parameter schema and an output schema, so the definition is mostly complete. The main gap is that the description does not explicitly route the agent to tiktok_get_user_info_by_profile_url for URL-based lookups, which is a natural alternative an agent should know about.

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 100% and the parameter schema already explains tiktok_id thoroughly: it is the @ handle, where to source it, and that @/URLs should not be passed. The tool description itself adds no further parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific action (获取/retrieve), a resource (用户公开资料/public profile), and the lookup key (根据 TikTok 号/by TikTok ID). It does not explicitly contrast itself with tiktok_get_user_info_by_profile_url, but the name and the 'by TikTok ID' qualifier make the differentiation reasonably clear.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you have a TikTok ID rather than a profile URL. However, it never names the URL-based sibling tool, and the only exclusion ('不要传用户主页链接') appears in the parameter schema, not in the tool description itself.

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