TikTok posting settings for an account

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, destructive false), the description adds substantive behavioral context: the no-caching requirement, the constraint that disabled interactions must be sent as false, and that the returned list of audiences is the only allowed set. It also confirms 'side-effect-free', aligning with annotations, and explains how to use results in a workflow.

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 a dense paragraph, but every sentence earns its place: purpose, usage, return fields, caching rule, and parameter note. It is slightly long but tightly packed with practical information; a more structured list or split into sentences would improve scannability.

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?

Given there is no output schema, the description thoroughly enumerates key returned fields (creator nicknames, privacy options, interaction flags, max duration) and explains their significance for scheduling. It also covers prerequisites (accountId from list_integrations), usage rules, and the read-only nature, making it complete for a tool of this 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?

The schema already covers accountId with a description matching the one in the tool description (`Integration id of the TikTok account (from list_integrations). Optional when only one is connected`). The description essentially repeats this information, adding no new meaning, so 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 clearly states the tool 'Read a connected TikTok account's CURRENT posting settings, straight from TikTok', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly tying its use to schedule_post and emphasizing it is a read operation.

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 gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('Call this before every TikTok schedule_post') and a critical no-caching rule. It also references list_integrations for accountId and provides a condition for omitting it, but it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternative tools for related tasks.

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