List who an account follows

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive. The description adds one useful behavioral detail, automatic pagination, but does not explain the result shape, how cursor/limit interract with the auto-paging, or behavior for missing actors.

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 short sentences with no filler; the resource statement is front-loaded and the pagination note is a separate, meaningful behavior. This is appropriately concise for a small read-only list tool.

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?

With rich annotations, a mostly descriptive schema, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, the absence of output-schema and lack of clarity about how cursor/limit relate to 'Pages automatically' leaves some uncertainty about the exact return format and pagination behavior.

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 already covers 75% of parameters with descriptions for actor, limit, and account. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, and the cursor parameter still lacks explanation beyond the hint from 'Pages automatically.'

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 identifies the resource: accounts a given account follows. The purpose is clear, but it does not explicitly differentiate this from siblings like get_followers or get_suggested_follows, and the main sentence is a noun phrase rather than a verb.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use get_follows versus alternatives such as get_followers, get_suggested_follows, or get_relationshipps. 'Pages automatically' is an operational note, not usage guidance.

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