get_users_by_id_following

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the description need not restate safety. The description adds useful context like the special 'me' value for id, but otherwise discloses no further behavioral traits such as pagination, sorting, or response composition.

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 short and scannable: the endpoint is front-loaded and the arguments are listed cleanly. There is minimal filler, though 'Get following' plus the endpoint is slightly redundant with the tool name.

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 list with an output schema, the call mechanics are present: endpoint, required id, and optional extended. It lacks a plain-language statement of what following actually returns and does not explain how to populate extended, leaving some ambiguity for an agent.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining id as a user slug with the special value 'me' for the authenticated user. However, extended is only described as 'Extended information to include in the response,' which leaves what values to pass or what extra fields appear unclear.

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 the operation as 'Get following' and gives the exact endpoint GET /users/{id}/following, clearly identifying verb and resource. It does not explicitly say this returns the users the given user follows (as opposed to followers), so it stops short of full sibling differentiation.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus related relationship tools such as get_users_by_id_followers or get_users_by_id_friends. The endpoint and name imply the use case, but there are no explicit context signals or exclusions.

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