douyin_check

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It discloses the output format ('stdout: valid/invalid'), which is valuable, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, network usage, or potential side effects. For a simple check tool, this is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that contains the essential purpose and output format without any filler. Every word contributes value.

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 simple one-parameter check tool, the description is nearly complete: it states the action, the resource, and the expected output. The output schema is present (even if not shown), and the description aligns with it. Minor gaps exist, such as not describing error behavior, but the tool's simplicity mitigates this.

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 only provides a bare string parameter named 'account' with 0% description coverage. The description adds critical meaning by specifying it is a 'Douyin account cookie', clarifying that the parameter is the cookie string itself, not just an account name.

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 specifies the action ('Check'), the target resource ('Douyin account cookie'), and the outcome ('valid/invalid'). It distinguishes from sibling tools by explicitly naming the platform and the operation type, unlike upload or other platform checks.

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?

The description clearly implies usage for validating a Douyin cookie, which is a distinct context from sibling checks for other platforms. No explicit alternatives are named, but the platform-specific purpose makes it unambiguous when to use this tool.

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