get_following

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination behavior, or the structure of returned data. The agent receives no insight beyond the basic operation.

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 concise (three words), but this brevity sacrifices essential context. While not verbose, it is not adequately structured to convey important details such as return format or usage constraints.

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?

Given that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should compensate with more context. It fails to explain what the response contains (e.g., list of user objects or IDs), pagination, or error cases. The tool's purpose is simple but incomplete for an AI agent to invoke confidently.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (userId and count), so the schema already explains their meaning. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema provides, meeting the minimum baseline of 3.

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?

The description 'Get users a user is following' clearly states the action (get) and resource (users a user is following). It is specific enough to convey the basic purpose, though it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_followers' which retrieves the reverse relationship.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_followers'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or scenarios where this tool is appropriate or when to choose another.

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