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

Annotations declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: it lists the returned fields, specifies the 'Comment not found' error string, and warns that the content is user-generated and should be treated as untrusted input. This goes beyond structured metadata.

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 with no waste; the primary action is front-loaded, followed by usage context, return fields, and a safety note. Every sentence earns its place.

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 get-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description compensates by listing return fields and the not-found behavior, while annotations cover the safety profile. An agent has all it needs to invoke and interpret the call.

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 100%, so the single parameter comment_id is already documented in the schema as 'TikTok comment ID (pk)'. The description only restates the ID concept and adds no syntax, format, or validation detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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?

States a specific verb 'Get' and resource 'one TikTok comment', identifies the id parameter as pk, and distinguishes from search_tt_comments and get_tt_comments_by_user by noting this retrieves the full record of a comment already found. An agent can select it correctly among siblings.

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?

Explicitly says to use it for the full record of a comment found with search_tt_comments or get_tt_comments_by_user, giving a clear precondition and naming the sibling tools that produce the ID. No when-not-to-use is stated, but the routing is unambiguous.

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