get_v1_user_followers_by_username

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds real value beyond them: one page per call, the pagination handoff (next_page_id -> page_id), and that it is a live billed request to TikTok. It stops short of describing rate limits or failure modes, so not a 5.

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?

Roughly three dense sentences, all front-loaded with purpose first, then routing, then pagination and cost. Every sentence carries distinct information with no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description still conveys the relevant return mechanic (next_page_id for pagination). Combined with the annotations, an agent has enough to invoke and page correctly, though response shape beyond the cursor is unstated.

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 only 33%, so the description must compensate, and it does: it explains page_id chaining from the previous response and defines count as page size with a default of 30. Only username's format is left unstated, which is minor.

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 ('List'), resource ('TikTok user's followers'), and lookup key ('by username'). It explicitly differentiates from the secUid variant and the following variant, so an agent can pick it without opening any schema.

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 an explicit selection rule ('use it when you have a handle') and names two alternatives with the conditions that favor them (secUid variant when you already have a secUid; following variant for accounts the user follows). Nothing is left to inference.

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