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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly discloses that the tool reads the exact tenant-owned session rather than the latest one, and that polling before user confirmation is prohibited. This reveals a non-obvious behavioral quirk. Minor gap: it doesn't state the return format or failure behavior, but the disclosed caveats show strong transparency.

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?

Two sentences deliver all necessary information: the action, the timing, the parameter sources, and the critical session-handling caveat. Information is front-loaded in order of importance, with zero filler.

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 2-parameter check tool with no annotations or output schema, the description covers the operation, prerequisites, parameter provenance, and an important behavioral constraint. It would benefit from stating what the check returns or whether it is a read-only operation, but nothing essential for invoking it correctly 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?

Schema provides only property names ('Channel', 'Connect Id') with no descriptions, 0% coverage. The description compensates by specifying channel='tiktok' as the expected literal and clarifying that connect_id comes from setup_begin_channel_connect. It adds meaningful source semantics beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb ('Check'), resource ('TikTok authorization'), and a clear timing condition ('AFTER the user confirms they finished'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling setup_begin_channel_connect by name-dropping that tool as the source of connect_id, making its role in the workflow unambiguous.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: call only after user confirmation. It also states what NOT to do ('never substitute the latest session or poll before user confirmation') and identifies where the connect_id comes from (setup_begin_channel_connect), which is clear operational guidance.

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