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

Annotations only cover the safety profile (readOnly, openWorld, non-destructive). The description goes well beyond them: 50 accounts per page, page-based fetching, a specific 403 limited_account error for accounts that hide their following list, and per-page billing at $0.006. This is exactly the operational context an agent needs.

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, each carrying distinct information: identity of the resource, return shape and page size, then error and cost. No filler and the purpose leads.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by naming the return shape (same profile fields as tiktok_user_followers) and pagination. Error behavior and pricing close the remaining gaps, so nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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%, so all four parameters (url, pages, user_id, username) are already documented with their formats and the exactly-one constraint. The description restates the identifier options and page size but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the 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?

Specific verb + resource ('Get the accounts a TikTok user follows') with the accepted identifier forms spelled out. It explicitly contrasts itself with the sibling tiktok_user_followers, so an agent can pick between the two without opening either schema.

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?

States the identifier constraint ('provide exactly one' of username, user ID, or profile URL) and the failure condition for private accounts. It implies the followers/following distinction via the sibling reference but never says in so many words when to prefer this tool over tiktok_user_profile or the followers variant.

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