search_account

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states that the tool searches by name and returns candidates with fakeid, but does not disclose potential behaviors such as ranking, pagination, or the possibility of multiple matches. This is minimally adequate.

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 efficient sentences plus a usage hint. No extraneous information, every sentence serves a purpose (purpose and usage guidance).

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 2 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and output usage. It lacks mention of potential multiple candidates or ranking, but for a search tool, the core information is present.

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 has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'query' is the account name and implies 'limit' controls result count (default 5). However, it does not describe 'limit' explicitly or provide format details, so only partial compensation.

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 verb 'Search', the resource 'WeChat Official Account', and the key output 'fakeid'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings that consume fakeid, like list_articles, by specifying the returned value's role.

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 explicitly instructs to use the returned fakeid for list_articles and crawl_incremental, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool or mention alternatives among siblings.

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