搜索知识星球话题

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool searches and returns summary, ID, and statistics, indicating a read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose details like pagination (limit, offset) or filtering (filter), nor mention any side effects or authentication needs. The behavioral disclosure is adequate but not rich.

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 concise with two sentences, no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the main action (search and return summary/ID/stats), and the second provides a logical follow-up action (retrieve full content by ID). Structure is 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 tool has 4 parameters (query, limit, offset, filter) and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain how to control result volume (limit, offset) or filtering (filter), which are important for a search tool. The sibling tools provide context but the description itself lacks completeness.

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 coverage is low (25%, only query has a description). The description adds no semantics for parameters like limit, offset, or filter beyond the schema's minimal info. It does not explain how these parameters affect the search, nor does it compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 clearly states the tool searches topic titles and content, returns summary, ID, and statistics. It distinguishes itself from siblings: zsxq_list_topics (list all) and zsxq_get_topic (get by ID), and zsxq_status (status). The verb '搜索' (search) and resource '话题' (topics) are specific.

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 implies usage for searching topics by query, which is distinct from listing or retrieving a single topic, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusions or prerequisites.

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