rednote_extract_patterns

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

No annotations, so description bears full burden. Discloses that it searches and analyzes notes collectively, and lists specific extracted outputs. Does not mention destructive actions or rate limits, but the scope is clear and safe.

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?

Two paragraphs plus an 'Args' section. Front-loaded with main purpose. Concise, but the structure could be more streamlined. No wasted sentences.

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides a reasonable understanding of tool behavior and inputs. Could mention return format, but not required.

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 coverage is 0%, but description adds examples for query (e.g., '美股投资') and explanation for limit (default 20). Compensates well for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Clearly states verb 'extract', resource 'common patterns from multiple RedNote notes', and topic analysis. Differentiates from siblings like rednote_analyze_note (single note) and rednote_search_notes (search only).

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?

Describes when to use: to identify title patterns, content structures, common tags, etc. from multiple notes. Does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but siblings list provides context.

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