xhs_search_notes

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds an important behavioral rule: the returned note_url must be preserved exactly with all query parameters, and not reconstructed from note_id. This goes beyond annotation defaults and prevents misuse. However, it does not mention pagination behavior or result count limits.

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 consists of two sentences: the first states the purpose concisely, the second provides a critical usage instruction. It is efficient with no redundancy. However, the second sentence is somewhat lengthy and could be broken into bullet points for better readability.

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?

Given the rich input schema (5 params with full descriptions) and output schema existence, the description compensates by adding the URL preservation rule. It lacks a high-level summary of the return structure (list of notes with fields), but the output schema likely covers that. Pagination is handled in schema via page_token parameter description. Overall, it is fairly complete for a read-only search tool.

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% for all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter information beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline without adding extra value.

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 '按关键词搜索相关小红书笔记' (search related Xiaohongshu notes by keyword), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like xhs_get_note_detail or xhs_get_search_hot_list. However, the description overshadows the purpose with a detailed instruction about URL handling, which slightly reduces clarity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., xhs_get_search_hot_list for trending, xhs_get_user_posted_notes for user-specific notes). There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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