Read posting permissions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the returned permissions are dynamic and can change when the creator toggles account privacy, and the privacy level must come from this exact list. This is useful, non-obvious behavior.

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, front-loads the core purpose, and gives the critical usage directive immediately. Every sentence adds value: what is returned, when to call it, and why the returned value is required. No wasted words.

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 simple read-only tool with one optional parameter, no nested objects, and no output schema, this description is complete. It states what data is returned, which post operations depend on it, and why it may change. An agent has everything it needs to call the tool correctly.

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?

There is only one optional parameter, and the schema description covers 100% of it, including how to list accounts. Per the baseline rule, a high schema coverage means the description need not repeat parameter details. The description adds no direct parameter semantics, but it does not need to.

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 exactly what the tool returns: available privacy levels, comment/duet/stitch toggles, and maximum upload duration. Although the tool name is generic ('get_creator_info'), the title and description make the specific resource—posting permissions—unmistakable and distinct from sibling tools like get_profile.

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, actionable guidance: 'Call this before post_video or post_photos.' It also explains the critical dependency—TikTok requires the privacy level to come from the returned list—and warns that the value changes when the account flips private. This leaves no ambiguity about when to invoke it.

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