weixin_search_all

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that the tool automatically turns pages, aggregates results, and stops under three named conditions (empty page, anti-crawler interception, page limit). This is useful context beyond simply saying 'search'. It doesn't cover auth requirements or return format, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 a single, dense sentence that front-loads the main action and resource, then provides the termination logic. Every part contributes essential information, with no redundant filler or restatement of the tool name.

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?

For a 2-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the key functional behavior and edge cases (stopping conditions) well. It does not describe the return format or error handling for anti-crawler interception, but the parameter schema is fully covered and the invocation logic is clear. Minor gap: it doesn't explain what 'aggregated results' look like.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides: the 'query' is a keyword and 'max_pages' is a page count with a default and hard limit. The tool description's mention of 'page limit' aligns with but does not exceed the schema's parameter description.

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 uses a specific verb phrase ('自动翻页搜索' - automatically paginate search) and clearly identifies the resource ('微信公众号文章') and action ('聚合结果' - aggregate results). It also lists explicit termination conditions (empty page, anti-crawler interception, page limit), which distinguishes it from the likely single-page sibling 'weixin_search' and the content-fetching sibling 'get_weixin_article_content'.

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?

Usage context is implied: an agent can infer this tool is for multi-page search aggregation because it explicitly mentions pagination and aggregation. However, the description does not either explicitly say when to use this vs. the sibling 'weixin_search' or state any exclusions. No alternatives are named.

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