social_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and excels by disclosing the critical auto-pagination behavior and prohibiting returning only the first page. This is essential for correct agent behavior and goes well beyond what the schema provides.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the purpose, defines the key parameter semantics, and specifies the pagination rule without any redundancy or fluff. It earns every word.

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?

The tool is complex with 8 parameters and no output schema. The description thoroughly covers the non-obvious pagination algorithm, which is the main risk for misuse. It does not describe the result item structure, but that is less critical and inferable from the purpose and sibling detail tools.

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?

Although the schema names all parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), the description adds crucial meaning: it clarifies that 'count' is the per-page target, not the user's total, and mandates echoing three pagination tokens together. This adds value beyond the schema fields.

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 '按关键词搜索抖音公开内容或用户' (search Douyin public content or users by keyword), identifying a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling getter tools like get_content_detail and get_user_posts.

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 gives explicit pagination instructions: count is per-page, and when has_more=true, the agent must pass back next_cursor, search_id, and search_context to continue until the user's total is met or no more results. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the search-vs-get distinction is clear from tool names and purpose.

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