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

The annotations already establish read-only and open-world behavior. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that, such as support for page_token pagination and the fact that searching is unnecessary when a direct identifier is already available. There is no annotation contradiction.

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 focused sentence with semicolon-separated clauses that front-load the purpose, then cover input restrictions, alternative routing, and pagination. There is no redundant or filler content.

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 two-parameter read-only search tool, the description fully covers when to use it, what to pass, what not to pass, which alternatives to choose, and how to paginate. Return format is not needed because an 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The top-level description restates the keyword constraint and mentions pagination, but it does not add meaning beyond what the schema already documents for keyword and page_token.

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 starts with the specific action and resource: '搜索快手作品' (search Kuaishou videos), and states the trigger condition '用户需要按搜索词查找作品时使用'. It clearly differentiates from sibling tools like kuaishou_search_users and the detail/comment tools by restricting input to a search term rather than IDs or URLs.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: only when searching by keyword. It also states exclusions: do not pass links, photo_id, or user_id, and says that if these identifiers already exist, the agent should directly use the corresponding detail or comment tools instead of searching first.

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