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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool operates on the latest session and requires no manual state, which is useful. However, it doesn't disclose what 'continue' entails (e.g., whether it mutates state, what happens if no session exists, or whether it returns a URL/status).

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then explains the key benefit. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter tool, the description is mostly complete. However, it lacks information about prerequisites (e.g., must have an existing onboarding session) and what the output/result looks like. Given no output schema and no annotations, a bit more context would help.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially complete. The description adds context by explaining why no parameters are needed (it automatically uses the latest session), which is valuable for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 ('continue'), the resource ('the authenticated tenant's latest TikTok auth onboarding session'), and the key benefit (no manual state or connection identifiers needed). It distinguishes itself from tiktok_begin_auth_onboarding, which starts a new session, though it doesn't explicitly name that sibling.

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 when to use it: after beginning an onboarding session, when continuing the latest session without identifiers. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., when a new session is needed) or mention alternatives like tiktok_begin_auth_onboarding.

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