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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results carry a poi_id usable downstream, which is useful chaining context. It says nothing about result volume, pagination, or how count interacts with the returned set.

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, purpose first, follow-up guidance second, no filler. Every clause carries actionable information.

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 one-required-param search with a full output schema and read-only annotations, the description supplies what an agent needs: what it searches and what to do with the poi_id it returns. Only minor gaps remain around result count behavior.

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% — 'count' (max 50) and the required 'keyword' are both documented in the schema. The description adds no further semantics about either parameter, 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?

Names a specific verb (search) and resource (TikTok places) with the required input (keyword), which cleanly separates it from the many sibling tiktok_mobile_search_hashtags / _music / _user / _effects tools. An agent can identify the right tool without opening the 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?

The second sentence gives an explicit next step: take the returned poi_id into tiktok_mobile_place_detail, _info, _videos, or _photos. That is concrete chaining guidance naming actual siblings. It stops short of saying when NOT to use this tool (e.g. browsing nearby places without a keyword).

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