wechat_post_moments

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses nothing beyond the bare action. It does not say the post is publicly visible to contacts, whether it is reversible/deletable, whether login/permission is required, or how media paths are validated.

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 short sentence that front-loads the action and stays tight with no filler. It is efficient, though so terse that conciseness shades into under-specification.

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 publish/mutation tool with zero annotation coverage, the description is too thin. The output schema removes the need to explain return values, but the absence of any behavioral, permission, or reversibility context leaves meaningful gaps.

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 both parameters are already documented in the schema, and the description merely echoes them as (文案 + 图片/视频). Baseline 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting and the description adds no format or constraint detail.

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?

States a specific verb (发布/publish) and resource (朋友圈/Moments), and the parenthetical clarifies the payload is text plus media. An agent can distinguish it from the read counterpart wechat_get_moments by the verb alone, though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing guidance. The posting intent is only implied by the verb; nothing tells the agent when this is preferable to another tool or what prerequisites exist.

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