follow_user

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

With openWorldHint=true, the description should disclose side effects or behavioral nuances (e.g., impact on recommendations, potential failure modes). Instead, it simply states 'Follow', adding no value beyond the annotations, which already signal a write operation with possible unknown effects.

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 extremely concise at one sentence. While it front-loads the core action, it lacks details that would better serve an agent, slightly reducing its value. Nonetheless, it is not verbose.

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 the simplicity of the tool and full schema coverage, the description is functionally adequate but incomplete for an agent. It omits success/error responses, rate limits, and authentication context, which would be helpful for reliable invocation.

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 100% and includes descriptions clarifying the mutual exclusivity of parameters. The description adds no new meaning; thus, it meets the baseline for high coverage without enhancing understanding beyond the schema.

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 ('Follow') and the resource ('a user on X'), specifying the platform and method. While it is explicit, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'unfollow_user' or 'check_follow_relationship', missing an opportunity to clarify its role.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisite conditions, such as authentication requirements or that only one of user_id or username should be provided, leaving the agent to infer from the schema.

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