douyin_parse_share_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does reasonably well: it declares the login/auth requirement, the internal two-step flow, and the degradation behavior when the short link can't be opened. It omits failure/rate-limit details and doesn't describe the direct-link format, so it is not exhaustive.

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?

A single dense paragraph, front-loaded with what the tool does before the mechanism and the fallback. Every sentence contributes, though the parenthetical example and internal-flow clause make it slightly packed.

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 two-parameter parse tool with no output schema, the description covers the important agent-facing facts: input format, login requirement, output content (details + watermark-free link), and failure fallback. Enough to invoke correctly, with only minor gaps around error/edge-case 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description illustrates the expected share_text shape with a concrete example, which is a small plus, but adds no meaning to the account parameter beyond the schema's own default-account explanation.

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: parses a Douyin share text/link into work details plus a watermark-free direct link. It also reveals the internal mechanism (follow short link → aweme_id → read details), which implicitly distinguishes it from douyin_video_detail, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

Gives clear context: use it when the user hands you raw share text or a v.douyin.com short link, and it notes the login prerequisite. The fallback (ask the user for the work id when the short link fails) effectively points at a manual alternative, but no sibling tool is named as the id-based route.

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