search_questions

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

无注释，描述提示关键词过长易返回空，提供了行为预期，但未说明权限、速率限制或结果排序等深层行为，仅基本覆盖。

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?

两句话，简洁无冗余，第一句直接说明功能，第二句补充使用场景和注意事项，结构合理。

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?

对于搜索工具，描述了返回内容和入口用途，且schema定义了参数，无输出schema但描述已涵盖主要返回字段，上下文基本完整，但未提及分页或最大条数限制。

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覆盖100%但描述额外补充了关键词精简（≤3词）的实用建议，超出schema本身的信息，对agent选择参数有增值。

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?

描述明确说明'按关键词搜索知乎问题'，动词（搜索）+资源（问题）具体，并列出返回字段（标题、描述、回答数等），与兄弟工具（search_articles等）区分明显。

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?

描述指出'适合需要精确问题列表'并作为后续get_fulltext/get_comments的入口，提供了使用场景，但未明确何时不使用此工具或与其他搜索工具的对比排除。

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