Following / followers

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

Annotations already disclose read-only, non-destructive, and open-world behavior. The description adds the return format (numeric user ids) and the intended downstream use (set_follow_user), which is useful context, but it does not cover details like authentication, rate limits, or pagination behavior beyond the 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 concise sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, and the mention of set_follow_user in the second sentence justifies the tool's existence without redundancy.

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 read-only tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value (numeric user ids) and the core functionality. It lacks details on pagination response structure, but the page parameter and schema cover the basics, making it adequate given the tool's low complexity.

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 67% (page and username have descriptions; direction only has an enum). The description's phrasing 'who follows them' loosely maps to the direction parameter, adding some meaning, but it does not explicitly explain the direction values or how pagination works. Baseline is 3 given the moderate coverage.

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 tool retrieves follow relationships (following/followers) and explicitly connects it to set_follow_user by noting it returns the numeric user ids needed for that operation. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_user_profile and set_follow_user.

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 provides context by stating the output is what set_follow_user needs, implying when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use alternatives or provide exclusions, falling short of full alternative guidance.

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