Search Creators

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful non-obvious context: the tool consumes 2 orchyn credits and returns creator fields such as follower count, signature, and verified status. No contradiction with annotations, and the credit cost is valuable behavioral context.

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?

Three sentences with the core purpose first, then cost, then usage guidance. There is no filler, no tautology, and every sentence earns its place.

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 search tool with full schema coverage, an output schema, and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, usage context, and cost. The only notable completeness gap is the inaccurate platform list, which could prevent correct invocation if an agent trusts the description over the schema.

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, but the description actively contradicts the schema by advertising YouTube and Douyin as platform options while the enum only supports tiktok, instagram, and xiaohongshu. It also adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the misinformation lowers the score.

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 names a specific action ('Search creators'), a clear resource, and search criteria (niche/keyword, platform), and it distinguishes itself from get_similar_creators. However, it lists YouTube and Douyin as supported platforms even though the schema's platform enum only allows tiktok, instagram, and xiaohongshu, making its stated scope partially inaccurate.

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?

Explicitly states the decision rule: use this tool when you know the niche but not names, and use get_similar_creators when you already have a working creator. This is exactly the kind of when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance that helps an agent select the right sibling.

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