Fetch WeChat Official Account article content from a provided URL and return markdown-formatted title, author, and body text.
Fetch and extract content from a WeChat Official Account article. Returns markdown-formatted article content including title, author, and body text.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| url | Yes | WeChat article URL (mp.weixin.qq.com) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It discloses the return format (markdown with title, author, body), which is useful, but omits other relevant traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or error handling for inaccessible articles.
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?
Two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action and target, the second describes the return format. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.
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 one-parameter fetch tool with no output schema, the description provides enough context: it names the source, the extraction behavior, and the return format. It could still mention usage conditions or limitations, but the core information is present.
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% and the single parameter is well documented in the schema. The description adds no extra meaning about the URL parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 ('fetch and extract') and a precise resource ('content from a WeChat Official Account article'), making the tool's purpose clear. It does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling fetch tools like fetch_tiktok_video or fetch_xiaohongshu_note, so it falls short of a 5.
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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state conditions, exclusions, or prerequisites beyond the implied need for a WeChat article URL.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.