xiaohongshu_search

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 discloses the need for local Chrome, the residential IP restriction (cloud/datacenter IP gets banned), required cookie fields, cookie file path, and concurrency behavior using BrowserLock with serialization. This is rich behavioral context beyond just saying 'search'.

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 concise, starting with the core purpose and then listing prerequisites and concurrency notes in a structured format. Each sentence provides actionable information, though the format is slightly scattered with line breaks and bullet points.

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?

The tool has an output schema, so return values are covered. The description covers the critical setup (cookies, IP) and concurrency control, making it complete for a search tool. It could mention error handling for missing cookies, but sibling tools like verify_login cover that part of the workflow.

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 input schema already covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (keyword and limit with default). The description adds no additional semantic meaning for the parameters, so the baseline score of 3 applies since the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 opens with '搜索小红书笔记' (Search Xiaohongshu notes), which clearly states the tool's verb and resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like xiaohongshu_note (retrieve a specific note) and xiaohongshu_comments (get comments), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 important prerequisites: local Chrome, XHS login cookies, and residential IP requirement. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over siblings or mention alternatives/exclusions. The usage context is clear but implied rather than explicit.

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