List LINE OA followers

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

Beyond annotations (readOnlyHint, destructiveHint), the description discloses region-gating, pagination with continuation_token, page_size limits, and the return format. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Very concise: three sentences that front-load the main action, cover gating, pagination details, and alternatives. No wasted words.

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?

Complete coverage for a paginated read tool: purpose, when to use, region/tier restrictions, pagination mechanics, return shape (JSON object), and alternative tool. No output schema needed given the description.

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 schema has only 25% description coverage. The description adds useful info for page_size and continuation_token, but the 'oa' parameter is not described, and the response_format default ('markdown') conflicts with the described return format (JSON object). Partial compensation.

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 clearly identifies the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('page through') and resource ('every user that has added the OA as a friend'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning an alternative for large OAs and specifying region/tier restrictions.

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 guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives: 'For very large OAs (50k+), prefer an engagement audience via line_build_audience_from_engagement over pulling all IDs.' Also notes region and tier gates.

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