wechat-cover

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 suggests a read/query operation and mentions returning '封面设计参考', but it does not clarify whether the output contains actual cover images, article links, design suggestions, or other data, nor does it disclose any limitations or side effects.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the core purpose. It loses a point because '爆款封面参考' and '封面设计参考' are somewhat redundant, but overall it is compact and easy to parse.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the caller receives. It only says the tool provides cover-design reference, leaving the return structure, item format, and any default behaviors unclear. The schema documents parameters adequately, but the overall context is incomplete for confident 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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents keyword, maxItems, and startDate. The description adds little beyond echoing the 'same niche' concept from the keyword parameter and does not explain the format or interaction of startDate or maxItems, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('查询' / query), a specific resource (公众号爆款文章 / viral WeChat official-account articles), and a clear purpose (获取封面设计参考 / obtain cover-design references). It distinguishes this tool from WeChat search/write tools by focusing on cover design, though it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives.

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 implies when to use the tool: when the user needs cover-design reference from viral articles in the same niche ('同赛道爆款文章'). However, it gives no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternative tools to prefer, such as wechat-search or xiaohongshu-cover.

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