search_destinations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The '不会发布' (will not publish) clause largely restates that non-mutating trait, and the description adds the workflow context (label feeds prepare_note) but discloses nothing new about auth, rate limits, or result shape.

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?

A single compact sentence with the purpose front-loaded and no filler; the workflow link and the '不会发布' caveat are appended tightly. Appropriately sized for a simple search tool.

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?

With no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description partially compensates by hinting that returned labels feed prepare_note.destination_option. Still, it leaves the returned candidate structure and the meaning of account/platform unaddressed for a tool with two required parameters.

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 0% and the description explains none of the three parameters (query, account, platform). It mentions '完整 label' but this refers to the returned value for destination_option, not to any input parameter, so the agent gets no added meaning for query length limits or the platform enum.

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 names a specific verb (query candidates) and resource (destination/location candidates within the publish form), which an agent can distinguish from list_notes or get_note. It also clarifies the downstream consumer (prepare_note.destination_option), grounding the purpose in the publishing workflow, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other sibling tools.

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?

Usage is implied: this is a pre-step for the publish flow whose output feeds prepare_note.destination_option, and the note '不会发布' signals it is not a publishing action. However, there is no explicit when-to-use statement or naming of alternatives among the nine siblings.

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