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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses pagination (~100 per page, cursor-based), cost (1 credit per page), and auth requirement (Bearer token). It doesn't describe rate limits, error behavior, or whether follower data ordering is stable.

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?

Compact and front-loaded: the operation, then requirements, then pricing, then platform/resource, then auth, then credit unit. The trailing metadata is slightly list-like, but every element is useful and there is no filler.

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?

Covers operation, input provenance, pagination, cost, auth, and resource tagging for a simple read/list tool with no output schema. Only missing pieces are return shape and error/rate-limit behavior, which are minor for this complexity.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description adds value by stating where id and sec_uid originate (User Info) and that pricing is per page, reinforcing the cursor's role in pagination beyond the schema's generic 'defaults to 0'.

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 and resource ('Fetch a page of followers for a user') with scope (~100 per page) and platform. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like tiktok_following and tiktok_user by naming what it returns.

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?

Specifies that id and sec_uid must come from User Info and that pagination is per page, giving clear prerequisites. It doesn't mention when to prefer this over alternatives like tiktok_following or tiktok_user, but the resource is unambiguous enough.

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