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 the downstream chaining relationship, which is useful behavioral context, but says nothing about pagination behavior or result shape despite the cursor parameter and output schema.

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 short sentences with zero filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded and the follow-up tool reference is placed second, which is the right ordering for an agent scanning for capability first.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and annotations cover the read-only/open-world profile. The description covers purpose and the next step in the chain; the only minor gap is that pagination via cursor is left entirely to the schema.

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 aweme_id, count, and cursor are already documented. The description only restates the video-ID input at a high level and adds no syntax, format, or defaulting detail beyond the schema, so the 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 (Find) and resource (TikTok sounds) scoped to a single video ID. It also names the sibling tiktok_mobile_music_posts, letting an agent distinguish this discovery tool from the sound-inspection tool without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent what to do with the output (feed sound IDs into tiktok_mobile_music_posts), which is actionable workflow guidance. It does not, however, distinguish when to use this over sibling sound-discovery tools like tiktok_mobile_search_music or tiktok_mobile_music_trending, so no explicit exclusion is offered.

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