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

Beyond the read-only and open-world annotations, it discloses result granularity, possible duplicate images from the same note, uncertain next-page availability, platform relevance ordering, and the lack of guaranteed keyword matching or complete recall. These details set accurate expectations about search and pagination behavior.

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 dense but front-loads the core purpose and organizes the remaining guidance into short semicolon-separated clauses. Each clause supplies actionable selection or behavioral information without filler.

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 search tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description supplies the essential selection, result-shape, ranking, recall, and pagination context. No important invocation prerequisite or limitation appears to be missing.

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 already fully documents both parameters, including detailed page_token handling rules. The description adds useful context that page_token only attempts to retrieve another page and that another page is not guaranteed, though most parameter-specific semantics remain in the schema.

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 states the verb, resource, and platform: searching Xiaohongshu images by keyword. It further distinguishes the tool's image-level results from note-detail retrieval and image or video note searches.

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 routing guidance: use a detail tool when a note link or note_id is already available, xhs_search_notes with note_type=image for image-text notes, and note_type=video for video notes. These conditions make selection among the relevant siblings straightforward.

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