Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
wechat-mcp

wechat-mcp

by RungePei
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

wechat_search_chat_history

Search WeChat chat history by keyword to locate matching conversations or messages. Optionally return hit counts or full message content for review.

Instructions

用关键字在微信中全局搜索聊天记录。

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "keyword": "<keyword>"
    },
    "name": "wechat_search_chat_history"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
numberNo最多获取多少条，默认不限
keywordYes搜索关键字
with_contentNo是否返回具体聊天内容；默认只返回命中数量

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv1.0.0

TDQS

B3.2/5.0
Behavior2/5

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, yet it discloses nothing beyond the search semantics implied by the name. It does not state that the operation is read-only, that results are limited/sorted, or what permissions are needed. The only behavioral hint (global scope) is minimal for a tool with zero annotation coverage.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though arguably undersized for a tool with no annotations and multiple parameters.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and parameters are covered by the schema. However, with no annotations the description should still convey more (read-only nature, result behavior, relationship to wechat_get_chat_history) than it does.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so keyword, number, and with_content are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no format, syntax, or matching-rule detail beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (搜索/search), resource (聊天记录/chat history), and scope (全局/global, 用关键字/by keyword). The 'global' qualifier implicitly distinguishes it from wechat_get_chat_history, but the sibling is never named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The word '全局' hints at when this is appropriate (cross-conversation lookup) versus a single-chat fetch, but there is no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or named alternative. Usage is only inferable from the scope adverb.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools