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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context about pagination and the token cost, but it does not mention rate limits, authentication requirements, or the structure of the response (though an output schema exists).

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?

The description is exceptionally concise: two sentences plus a cost note. It front-loads the core purpose in the first sentence and includes only necessary information about requirements and pagination.

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 simple list tool with an output schema, the description provides essential guidance (required param and pagination) plus cost. It lacks explicit notes about authorization or error handling, but these are not critical for the basic use case.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters. The description reinforces the need for user_id and the pagination role of cursor, but does not add substantially new meaning beyond the schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the action ('List followers') and the resource ('a TikTok user'), using a specific verb and noun. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tiktok.user_following by explicitly mentioning 'followers' rather than 'following'.

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?

The description states that user_id is required and explains how to paginate using cursor from a previous response. It implies the tool is for retrieving follower lists but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like user_following or provide conditions for when not to use this tool.

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