tiktok_list_advertisers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the operation (read-only list), the authorization scope (current token), and the return fields (ID, name, status). It does not mention pagination or errors, but for a zero-parameter read-only listing tool this is adequately transparent.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The action and scope are front-loaded, and the return fields are stated in a compact second sentence.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with no output schema, the description is sufficient: it tells the agent what the operation is, what the result contains, and under which token scope. No essential calling detail is missing at this complexity level.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description does not need to add parameter detail because there are no parameters to document; the schema coverage is effectively complete.

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'), a clear resource ('TikTok advertiser accounts accessible with the current token'), and enumerates the returned fields (ID, name, status). This clearly separates it from sibling tools like tiktok_get_advertiser_info, which implies retrieving a single advertiser's details.

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 usage is implied from the scope ('accessible with the current token') and the list operation, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of tiktok_get_advertiser_info or other siblings. It provides context but no exclusions or alternatives.

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