social_wechat

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as data returned, error handling, rate limits (only free tier count), or destructive potential. The pricing info is present but insufficient for transparency.

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 very short but includes pricing and API URL, which are somewhat extraneous. It is concise but lacks front-loaded purpose clarification. Overall, it is not verbose but could be more structured.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not describe the output format, usage notes, or any additional context to aid the agent in using the tool 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?

The input schema has one parameter 'query' with a description '搜索关键词' (search keywords). The schema coverage is 100%, so the schema already conveys parameter meaning. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the resource as '微信公众号数据' (WeChat public account data) and uses '[Social]' to categorize it. It distinguishes from sibling social tools (e.g., social_twitter) by specifying WeChat, but lacks a clear verb like 'search' or 'get', leaving the action implied.

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 only pricing and an API URL, with no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other social tools like social_weibo). No when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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