Profile Region

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

Annotations already disclose readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description usefully explains that gap by noting these are 'read-like POST requests' that 'do not publish to social platforms,' plus the credit cost. It does not cover rate limits or error behavior, so it stops short of 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?

Two front-loaded sentences with zero filler: the first gives the purpose and sample output, the second the cost/confirmation constraint and the semantic reassurance about POST usage.

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 single-value lookup with a fully documented schema, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, and the behavioral oddity of a non-read-only POST. It lacks only error/failure behavior, which is a minor gap given no output schema exists.

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 handle, account, and confirm are fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes the confirm=true requirement, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the structured fields. Baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Returns the TikTok region code for a public profile') and even illustrates the output format with concrete examples (US, MX). It is clear what the tool does, though it does not name tiktok_profile or any sibling to differentiate itself 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 a concrete prerequisite: 'Potentially consumes paid API credits; requires confirm=true.' That tells the agent when this call is appropriate and what gate it must clear, but it offers no alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance relative to the many sibling profile tools.

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