tiktok_interest_targeting

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

With no annotations, the description must stand alone: 'Get' signals a read-only operation, which is useful, but no side-effect, auth/scope, pagination, or output behavior is disclosed. Since an output schema exists, some of this burden is relieved, but the text adds only minimal behavioral context beyond the word 'Get.'

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?

One sentence that front-loads the actionable resource and purpose immediately. No fluff, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description provides the core 'what' and 'why' but not the 'when not' or platform-alternative context. This is borderline acceptable given low complexity, but the missing selection guidance keeps it from a 5.

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 advertiser_id and format with 100% coverage, so the baseline is satisfied. The description adds no additional meaning about parameter formats, constraints, or their relationship to the returned categories.

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 ('Get') and resource ('TikTok Ads interest categories'), making the tool's core function identifiable. It clearly communicates the research purpose, and the platform name separates it from cross-platform siblings like meta_interest_targeting, though it doesn't explicitly spell out when to choose it over them.

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 phrase 'for audience targeting research' gives an implicit context for using the tool, but no when/when-not statements or alternatives are given. An agent must infer that this is for TikTok-specific research rather than Meta or LinkedIn, and isn't warned about when not to use it.

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