get_v1_user_suggested_by_username

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: live request to TikTok, billed per call, and the pagination contract (one page per call, next_page_id flows into page_id).

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 tightly packed sentences: purpose first, alternatives second, operational details third. Zero filler, and the distinguishing information is front-loaded.

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?

With no output schema, the description still conveys the pagination return contract (next_page_id), cost model, and endpoint path. Everything an agent needs to call and chain this tool is present.

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% (only page_id is described in the schema), so the description must compensate. It clarifies page_id's role via the pagination flow and notes count sets page size with default 30, adding practical meaning beyond the bare integer type.

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 and resource ('List the accounts TikTok suggests as related to a user') with the scoping dimension (by username) that separates it from the secUid variant. An agent can distinguish it from get_v1_user_suggested_by_secUid without opening either 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?

Explicitly routes to alternatives with conditions: use get_v1_user_suggested_by_secUid when you already have the secUid, and get_v2_search for keyword search. This is the when-to-use/when-not guidance done properly.

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