get_v2_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds context annotations cannot: it is a live, per-call billed request against TikTok, and it discloses the paging contract (next_page_id -> page_id) and that offset is superseded. It stops short of describing result shape or failure/rate-limit behavior.

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 compact sentences, each doing distinct work: routing, pagination mechanics, and cost. The disambiguation clause is front-loaded right after the purpose statement.

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 no-output-schema, read-only search tool, the description covers routing, pagination, and cost — the main things an agent needs. Minor gaps remain on result volume/limits and what a page contains, but nothing blocks correct invocation.

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 50%, so the description must carry weight, and it does for the tricky params: it explains the page_id/offset relationship and that offset cannot page alone. `count` (default 20, max 30) is left entirely to the schema with no textual elaboration, which keeps it from a 5.

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 ('Search TikTok by keyword') plus a scope constraint ('one page per call'), and names the sibling resources it is not for (handle, link, id, hashtag). An agent can distinguish it from get_v1_hashtag_info and get_v1_user_by_username 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?

Explicit when-to-use ('when you have a topic rather than a handle, link or id') paired with named alternatives for the other cases. It also gives forward guidance on pagination flow and deprecation of `offset`.

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