tiktok_comments: GET /

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

With no annotations, the description carries more behavioral burden. It discloses that the video must be public, describes what each returned comment contains, and mentions nextPageToken-based pagination. It could additionally mention rate limits, auth requirements, or error behavior, but it is already substantially transparent for a GET tool.

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?

The description is front-loaded and each sentence contributes something useful: scope, return fields, pagination, or intended use. It is slightly longer than minimal, but the extra detail is justified because there is no output schema to explain return values.

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 tool with three parameters and a meaningful output shape, the description covers request behavior, both comment modes, pagination, and the main response fields. The main gap is operational detail such as rate limits, response envelope, and failure modes, but the available context is already strong.

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 input schema already documents all three parameters at 100% coverage, including commentId's reply-switching behavior and nextPageToken's purpose. The description reinforces but does not meaningfully extend the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Fetches') with a clear resource: TikTok video comments. It distinguishes two distinct modes — top-level comments by videoId and replies by commentId — and clearly separates this from the sibling profile, posts, and search tools.

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?

It gives concrete use cases ('sentiment analysis, engagement research, building comment datasets') and situates the tool in a workflow ('a video discovered via the posts or search APIs'). It does not explicitly say 'when not to use', but the context is sufficient for an agent to select it correctly among siblings.

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