get_user_followers

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

There are no annotations, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses pagination via cursor, which is useful, but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, error behavior, or response format. This is a read-only operation, reducing risk, but the disclosure is minimal.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the primary action and immediately states pagination. No wasted words, all information is relevant.

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 list tool, the description covers the core action and pagination. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it lacks details on the exact structure of returned 'accounts' (e.g., user objects vs. IDs), ordering, or error conditions, leaving reasonable gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the user_id parameter ('given user id') and cursor (pagination), adding meaning. However, it omits the count parameter entirely, leaving its purpose inferable only from the schema default.

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 accounts following a given user id, using a specific verb and resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like get_user_following (which lists who a user follows) and search_users.

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 implies use for retrieving followers but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_user_following. Sibling tools exist but are not referenced, leaving usage context implicit.

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