wechat_get_account

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. The description indicates a non-destructive read operation (get info), which is correct. However, it does not specify any behavioral details such as auth requirements, rate limits, or what happens if the account does not exist. The output schema exists but is not described here.

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?

Description is brief and front-loaded with the core purpose. Two sentences cover purpose and parameters without superfluous text. Could be improved with slightly more structure (e.g., bullet points for parameters), but currently efficient.

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 the output schema exists, description does not need to detail return values. The tool has 2 parameters (1 required) and no complex nested objects, so completeness is modest. However, the description lacks guidance on error handling, data freshness, or curation criteria of '优质库', which would help the agent in edge cases.

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 0%, so description must compensate. The description explains that 'account' is the WeChat ID (微信号) and 'account_name' is the WeChat official account name (公众号名称), adding meaning beyond the schema's bare type definitions. This is helpful but minimal; no further detail on format or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states the tool retrieves WeChat official account information, identifying the resource (WeChat official account) and action (get account info). The mention of '优质库' suggests a curated data source, which adds specificity. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like 'wechat_get_user_works' or 'wechat_get_work', which share the 'get' verb and WeChat context.

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 explicitly marks 'account' as required and 'account_name' as optional, providing basic input guidance. No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., searching for accounts first via 'wechat_search_users'). No conditions or exclusions mentioned.

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