search_wechat_articles_batch

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

The description transparently discloses operational behavior beyond the readOnlyHint annotation: request interval 1.2 seconds, max 12 calls per 45 seconds, captcha or 429/403 terminates the batch, candidates are written to a recoverable ledger, and complete history is not guaranteed. These specifics on rate limiting, failure handling, and recovery add substantial value beyond annotations.

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 semicolons, efficiently packing rate limits, failure modes, and ledger recovery. It front-loads the purpose and then specifies constraints. However, it omits core functional details, so while concise, it is not fully informative.

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 tool with 7 parameters, low schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool returns, how to structure a query, or how the batch process works. The focus on rate limiting and error handling overshadows the actual search functionality, leaving critical gaps for an agent to call it correctly.

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 only 14%, and the description provides no parameter explanations. It does not clarify the meaning of query, queries, start_time, end_time, max_pages, or account_name. The only parameter hint is in the schema itself for 'days'. The description adds no semantic value for parameters, leaving the agent to guess how to construct a valid call.

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 the tool performs '高强度多轮发现公众号文章' (high-intensity multi-round discovery of WeChat public account articles), which clearly indicates a batch discovery/search function. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_wechat_articles by emphasizing multi-round and rate-limited operation. However, it does not explicitly state what the tool returns or how it relates to a search query, leaving the core purpose slightly implied rather than fully explicit.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It mentions rate limits and error handling but does not state scenarios where batch discovery is preferred over single-search tools like search_wechat_articles or search_wechat_articles_tencent. There is no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or selection criteria.

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