search_wechat_articles_tencent

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

Annotations already mark this as read-only and non-destructive, and the description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: credential pre-configuration, potential Tencent Cloud charges, no guarantee of full public-account history, and no automatic fallback to free search. These details directly inform agent expectations and invocation decisions.

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 compact but information-dense, front-loading the core function and scope before layering in prerequisites, costs, and limitations. Every clause adds necessary context; there is no filler or repetition of schema information.

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?

Given two simple parameters, no output schema, and the real-world complexity of a paid, credential-gated external search, the description covers the essential operational facts: result shape, time scope, credentials, billing, historical coverage limits, and fallback behavior. An agent has enough context to decide whether to invoke it and what to expect.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'days' represents a recent-N-day window and that the search is scoped to WeChat official-account domains, but it does not explicitly explain the 'query' parameter beyond what the tool name and schema constraints imply.

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 (search) and resource (WeChat public-account articles via Tencent Cloud WSA), and adds clear scope constraints: restricted to official-account domains, recent N days, returning candidate URLs and images. It also differentiates itself from the free search by explicitly stating it will not automatically switch from free search.

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 conveys when this tool is appropriate: when an official Tencent Cloud WSA search is desired, within a recent time window, and when credentials are already configured. It warns that it will not automatically fall back to free search and that full history is not guaranteed, implicitly steering agents away when free or broader search is required. It does not name a specific sibling alternative, so it stops short of fully explicit routing.

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