List trending TikTok music

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds valuable behavioral context about the required TikTok capability and the distinction between two ID fields that could cause errors. It doesn't contradict annotations. The slight deduction is because it doesn't mention any rate limits or pagination, but the description goes beyond the annotations sufficiently.

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 single paragraph that is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose (trending tracks to soundtrack a video), then provides essential integration details. Every sentence earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

The tool is relatively simple (4 optional parameters, one required) and has a rich output schema (not shown but noted). The description covers the critical context: the purpose, the capability requirement, and the correct usage in a downstream tool. Nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 all four parameters are documented in the schema. The description does not elaborate on parameters beyond the schema, but that is acceptable given the full coverage. The baseline of 3 applies. The description does add context about the returned id's usage, but that's not parameter-specific.

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 'lists trending tracks from the TikTok Commercial Music Library' with specific purpose (to soundtrack a TikTok video) and distinguishes it from the sibling tiktok_music_search by focusing on trending tracks rather than general search. The resource and action are specific and unambiguous.

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 explicit guidance: it says to pass the returned track id as `tiktokMusicId` in upload_video's platformOptions and warns against using `commercial_music_id` because TikTok rejects it on public posts. It also states that the tool is available on TikTok connections that declare the `music` capability, and directs users to check `capabilities` in list_users. This makes when to use it and how to integrate with other tools clear.

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