search_videos

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered structurally. The description's remaining content (returned fields) duplicates the output schema rather than adding behavioral context such as pagination, rate limits, or result ordering. Some value, but not beyond structured data.

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, zero waste, with the core action and its input modes front-loaded before the return-value note. Appropriately sized for a simple two-parameter search.

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 a 100%-documented schema, full annotations, and an output schema covering return values, the description covers what an agent needs to invoke the tool. The only gap is routing guidance relative to the five sibling tools, which is a usage concern more than a completeness one.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the '#' hashtag prefix convention is already documented on the query parameter. The description's 'by keyword or hashtag' restates that schema content rather than extending it, so the baseline 3 applies.

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+resource ('Search TikTok videos') and adds the scoping dimension ('by keyword or hashtag'), which lets an agent distinguish it from the sibling get_videos (profile-scoped fetch). It stops short of explicitly contrasting itself with the alternatives, so it is clear but not fully differentiated.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the sibling tools (get_videos, discover_creators) that an agent must choose between. The only hint is the implied 'keyword/hashtag' scope, which the agent has to infer.

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