tiktok list ad images

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond this: image URLs are publicly served and signed for about thirty days, with the exact expiration provided via image_url_expires_at. This informs the agent about time-sensitive data without contradicting the annotations.

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, compact sentence that front-loads the primary action and resource, then adds the most critical return fields and URL expiry behavior. Every clause earns its place, with no filler or redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, the description adequately covers what an agent needs to know: the resource scope, pagination hints through 'whole library', and the time-sensitive nature of the URLs. It is complete for a read-only list operation with three well-documented parameters.

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 the parameters (advertiserId, page, pageSize) are already well documented. The description does not add parameter-specific semantics beyond noting it lists the 'whole' library, which implicitly suggests pagination is relevant. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the parameter meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), resource ('advertiser's whole image library'), and enumerates the exact fields returned (file name, dimensions, signature, carousel usability, signed URL). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like tiktok_list_ad_videos and tiktok_get_video_assets, which target different asset types.

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 clearly implies when to use it: when the agent needs the advertiser's full image library, including all categories (file/image/ad/search). It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over video-focused siblings.

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