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

With readOnlyHint declared, the description still adds real context: results come in TikTok's own feed order (not a sortable order), the response includes a cursor for the next page, and each call costs 1 credit. That credit cost and pagination contract are behavior the annotations cannot convey.

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 short sentences, each earning its place: the scope first, then ordering and pagination, then cost. Nothing is repeated from the name or title.

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, the description does tell the agent what comes back (a page of TikToks plus a next-page cursor) and what the call costs. It stops short of describing response fields like video stats or author info, which would be the remaining gap.

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 75%, with count (default 30, max 30), cursor source, and hashtag format all documented inline. The description adds nothing about the parameters, and cache_max_age remains undocumented in both places, so 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?

The description names a specific verb and resource: it returns TikToks carrying a given hashtag, in TikTok's own feed order. It implicitly separates this from tiktok_hashtag (hashtag metadata) but never names a sibling or states the contrast explicitly.

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 only implied — an agent infers it should call this when it has a hashtag string and wants the videos. There is no statement of when to prefer tiktok_searchSuggestions, tiktok_popularVideos, or tiktok_songVideos instead, and no prerequisites are mentioned.

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