gzh-astock-top

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It does reveal the search behavior, the default A-share domain, and that the result contains account and latest-article data. It stops short of explaining ranking criteria, pagination behavior, or any limits or permissions, so it is only moderately 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 efficient sentence with a parenthetical that packs in the domain, action, default, and returned data. There is no filler or redundancy, and the most identifying information is front-loaded.

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 simple tool with two optional parameters, the description is mostly adequate: it identifies the returned data and the default keyword behavior. However, without an output schema or annotations, the exact response shape, ranking order, and offset semantics remain underspecified.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds some semantic context to keyword by noting the default A股 domain and the expected output, but offset is only documented in the schema as '偏移量' and receives no additional explanation.

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 (搜索), a clear resource (公众号账号排行), and a domain (A股), and even states the return contents (账号与最新文章数据). It is clearly more informative than the name alone, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling tools such as wechat-top-account or stock-feed.

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 phrasing '按关键词搜索公众号账号排行（默认A股领域）' implies the intended use case: find WeChat public-account A-share rankings by keyword. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to prefer this tool over sibling ranking/search tools or when not to use it.

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