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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as response format or handling of non-existent handles, but it is fully consistent with the annotations.

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, tightly worded sentence with zero filler. The action and target are front-loaded, making the tool's purpose immediately apparent.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient to understand its function and input. The return value is implicitly a boolean (live or not), which is acceptable for a check. No critical information 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?

The input schema fully documents the handle parameter with a helpful description ('TikTok handle to look up, with or without a leading @'). The tool description adds nothing beyond that, so with 100% schema coverage, 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?

States a specific verb 'check', a named resource 'TikTok creator', and the precise condition 'currently live'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tiktok_profile_get or tiktok_profile_videos_list, which have different purposes.

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 implies the use case: when you need to know if a creator is live, this is the tool. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives explicitly, but the context is clear and unambiguous from the purpose statement.

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