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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the filter semantics but says nothing about pagination, result caps, or required auth scope beyond what annotations carry.

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?

A single tight sentence with the core listing action front-loaded and the filter condition immediately after. No filler, though it is sparse enough that more detail could have been added without bloat.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, but for a 2-parameter tool with zero schema descriptions, the absence of any advertiser_id guidance and any pagination/result-count context leaves an agent under-informed.

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 0% for two parameters, so the description must compensate. It explains only campaign_id; advertiser_id — likely required in practice for a TikTok listing — is never mentioned, leaving half the inputs undocumented.

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 (Lists) and resource (TikTok ad groups) with the scoping behavior of campaign_id. It is clearly distinguishable from siblings like list_tiktok_campaigns and list_tiktok_ads by resource, though it never names an alternative 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?

The conditional clause 'if campaign_id is provided, limits to that campaign' implies how to narrow the listing, but there is no statement of when to use this versus list_tiktok_ads, list_tiktok_campaigns, or when not to call it (e.g. missing auth/advertiser context).

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