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

Adds substantial value beyond the annotations: it discloses ordering ('newest first'), a hard depth cap independent of paging, an authentication prerequisite ('requires a configured TikTok signer'), and a cost ('1 credit'). It stops short of describing the per-item payload or what happens when the signer is not configured.

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?

Front-loaded with the core identity before caveats, and every sentence carries information (ordering, cap, auth, cost). Mild redundancy between 'Accounts following a creator' and 'The public follower list for a TikTok account' costs it the top mark.

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?

With no output schema, a 4-parameter read-only tool needs the ordering, cost, auth, and paging limits explained — and all four are present. The only real gap is the shape of returned follower records and failure behavior without a signer.

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 75%, so the schema already documents handle, count, and cursor meaningfully. The description only alludes to paging behavior ('regardless of paging') and adds no semantics for cache_max_age, which is undocumented everywhere. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource combination ('Accounts following a creator', 'public follower list for a TikTok account') that an agent can immediately map to the intended data. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from near-neighbors in the sibling list such as tiktok_profile or mixcloud_followers/github_followers.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource described (fetch followers of a creator), but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no pointer to an alternative tool if this one hits its depth cap. The 'TikTok caps how deep this list can be walked' note is a behavioral caveat rather than a usage rule.

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