Get Similar Creators

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds meaningful context by disclosing that the call consumes 2 orchyn credits and mentioning the free credit allowance. No contradiction with the annotations exists; rate limits or other operational details are absent but not expected given annotation coverage.

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 core purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the subsequent sentences about scaling and credit cost each earn their place. There is a minor formatting run-on ('users).Use') and the description is slightly dense, but it is still concise overall.

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 only two parameters, an output schema, and rich annotations, the description covers purpose, platform options, credit cost, and the right usage scenario. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke 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?

The input schema already provides full descriptions for both parameters, including the platform enum default and a seed handle example. With 100% schema coverage, the description's references to a handle and platform add little beyond the structured fields, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action and resource: 'Find lookalike creators for a given handle' and further scopes it to TikTok or Instagram. The concept of 'lookalike' clearly sets it apart from generic creator search among the sibling tools, even though it doesn't name a specific sibling.

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?

It provides an explicit trigger: 'Use when one creator already fits and you want more of the same.' This is clear context, but it does not mention when not to use it or name alternative tools, stopping short of full guidance.

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