Read a post’s Spark-Ads authorization status

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description reinforces that by saying 'Read-only, free.' Beyond annotations, the description discloses a critical behavioral quirk: unlike typical tools that return a not-found error, this tool gets a TikTok error when there is no authorization code, which the description interprets as likely meaning authorization was never turned on. This is valuable context beyond what annotations offer and helps the agent interpret failure modes correctly.

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 three sentences long, each carrying essential information: purpose, critical warning about authorization expiry, and error interpretation with a pointer to the setup tool. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and then adds behavioral context. The use of ALL CAPS for emphasis on key points is somewhat heavy-handed but not confusing. It's concise given the amount of behavioral nuance it conveys, though it could be slightly tightened.

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 read-only tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description fully equips an agent: it states what it returns, warns about the authorization window, explains error behavior, and points to prerequisites and related tools. There is nothing missing that an agent would need to call this tool correctly and interpret the result.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage with a clear description for the single required parameter 'itemId' as 'the TikTok post id'. The tool description does not add additional parameter semantics, but since the schema already fully documents the parameter, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate. The description's mention of 'the authorized account owns' implies that the post must belong to the account, but that's scope, not parameter semantics.

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 ('Read'), a resource ('Spark-Ads authorization status'), and a scope ('of a post the authorized account owns'). It explicitly lists what the tool returns (promotable, authorization code, window) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like set_tiktok_post_ad_authorization and extend_tiktok_post_ad_authorization by the action performed. An agent can immediately understand the tool's purpose and how it differs from related tools.

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 gives explicit usage context: check the end time before building a campaign, indicating when this tool is relevant. It also explains a common failure mode (TikTok errors when no authorization code) and directs to the alternative set_tiktok_post_ad_authorization. Additionally, it states a prerequisite (needs TikTok account authorization) and refers to a specific tool for checking that (tiktok_account_status). This is comprehensive when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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