tiktok_get_adgroups

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does disclose the kind of returned data (targeting, budget, optimization goal, schedule info), which is useful, but it does not mention read-only safety explicitly, pagination behavior, or any side effects. 'List' implies a read operation, so it is not misleading, just incomplete.

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 one concise sentence that states the primary action and the key returned data. It is front-loaded and readable, though it could add a brief usage hint without much bloat.

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 straightforward listing tool with one required parameter and no output schema, the description gives the essential return contents. However, it lacks any indication of pagination limits, sibling distinctions, or prerequisites, so an agent might not know when this tool is the right choice among the many similar TikTok list tools.

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 coverage is 67%, with advertiserId and campaignId documented in the schema; the limit parameter has no description but has clear default/min/max values. The description adds only marginal semantic value by clarifying the scope ('for a TikTok advertiser'), which aligns with advertiserId, but does not explain campaignId filtering or limit behavior.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('ad groups for a TikTok advertiser'), and specifies the returned information. It is distinct from siblings like tiktok_get_campaigns and tiktok_get_ads, but does not explicitly contrast itself against them in the description.

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 descrption provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs the many sibing list tools (e.g., tiktok_get_campaigns, tiktok_get_ads). No exclusions or alternative routes are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer from the word 'ad groups' alone.

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