tiktok_get_video_assets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that results come from two endpoints and are only returned 'when available,' but it does not explain what affects availability, how adIds and videoIds interact, whether this is strictly read-only, or what the response looks like. The caveat is too vague to be actionable.

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 sentence with no filler and states the core action upfront. However, the phrasing 'ad/get and video material endpoints' is slightly awkward and 'when available' is vague, which keeps it from being exemplary.

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 there are no annotations, no output schema, and five parameters, this short description is incomplete. It omits return-value structure, parameter interaction, failure behavior, and any guidance on when data is unavailable. An agent would need to guess important calling conventions.

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?

Input schema coverage is high at 80%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, only clarifying the ad-linked/video material context. Since the schema carries most of the semantic burden, a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clear verb ('Return') and a specific resource ('ad-linked TikTok video asset metadata'), and names the underlying source endpoints. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like tiktok_get_creatives, but the focus on video assets and ad linkage is reasonably distinct.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as tiktok_get_creatives or tiktok_get_ads. The description does not mention preferred scenarios, exclusions, or fallback tools, leaving the agent to infer use cases.

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