follow_user

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 usefully discloses the navigation side effect ('navigates to their profile first') and the fallback behavior tied to page state, which are non-obvious traits. It stops short of covering auth requirements, reversibility, or rate limits, but the core behavior is well conveyed.

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, front-loaded with the core action, with no redundant or filler content. The conditional logic is compact and readable.

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 one-parameter, no-annotation, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, conditional usage, and navigation behavior sufficiently for an agent to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps around auth/session requirements and return behavior are tolerable given the tool's simplicity.

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%, so the baseline is 3, and the description genuinely adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the conditional default when username is omitted ('follows the author of the currently open tweet'). This clarifies the parameter's effect in context.

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?

States a specific verb (Follow) and resource (a user on Twitter/X), and immediately disambiguates the two operating modes. An agent can distinguish this from like_tweet, retweet, or scrape_* siblings without opening any schema.

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?

Clearly states both usage paths: pass username to follow a specific user, omit it to follow the author of the currently open tweet. This gives explicit when-to-use conditions for each branch, though it does not name alternatives or prerequisites (e.g., must be logged in).

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