feishu_search_doc_wiki

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds useful context beyond basic functionality, such as highlighting that results include titles and summaries with keyword highlighting (<h> tags), and notes on filtering behavior (e.g., applying the same filter to both documents and wikis). However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, error handling, or pagination behavior (though pagination is hinted at via parameters), leaving some gaps in transparency.

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 is appropriately sized and front-loaded, starting with the tool's purpose and key actions. It uses bullet-point-like emphasis (【重要】) to highlight critical information, making it easy to scan. However, some sentences are slightly repetitive (e.g., repeating filter behavior), and the structure could be more streamlined, preventing a perfect score of 5.

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 tool's complexity (5 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations), the description is moderately complete. It covers the main purpose, key parameters, and result formatting, but lacks details on output structure, error cases, authentication needs, or performance limits. Without annotations or an output schema, these gaps make it adequate but not fully comprehensive for an agent to handle all scenarios.

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?

The schema description coverage is high (80%), so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema by emphasizing the importance of the 'query' and 'filter' parameters, explaining that 'filter' applies to both documents and wikis when used, and listing examples of filter dimensions (e.g., document type, creator, creation time). This provides practical guidance that enhances understanding, though it doesn't cover all parameters in depth, such as 'page_token' or 'page_size'.

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 the tool's purpose: '飞书文档与 Wiki 统一搜索工具。同时搜索云空间文档和知识库 Wiki。Actions: search.' It specifies the exact verb ('search') and resources ('云空间文档和知识库 Wiki'), and distinguishes itself from siblings by focusing on unified search across documents and wikis, unlike other tools that handle specific operations like creating, updating, or listing individual resources.

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 clear context for when to use this tool: for searching documents and wikis in Feishu. It mentions that the 'query' parameter is required and 'filter' is optional, with guidance on how filtering works. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools for similar functions, such as 'feishu_search_user' for user searches, which limits the score to 4.

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