playlet-wechat-feed

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals important behavior: daily update timing, strict date-boundary rule, and the no-auto-fallback policy. It doesn't describe response format or error behavior, but the key operational traits are disclosed.

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 with no filler. Every clause contributes either resource identification, sorting behavior, data freshness, or a constraint. The purpose is front-loaded and the constraints are compactly packed.

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 two-parameter read-only feed query with no output schema, the description covers the resource, sort order, data freshness, date constraints, and the no-fallback rule. It doesn't enumerate return fields, but the nature of a ranked article list is reasonably inferable and not essential for invocation.

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 schema already documents both date and count. The description adds meaningful semantic value for the date parameter: allowed range relative to the latest data day, update freshness, and the requirement to confirm no-data dates rather than silently fall back. Count is sufficiently covered by the schema alone.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 查询公众号短剧爆款榜 (query WeChat official-account short-drama hit list), and adds distinguishing attributes: by date, sorted by read count. This clearly differentiates it from sibling platform feeds like playlet-douyin-feed or cultural-tourism-wechat-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 description gives concrete operational guidance: data updates at 15:00 for the previous day, query date must be no later than the latest data date, no-data dates must be confirmed before querying, and automatic fallback is forbidden. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a 5.

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