Get WeChat article analytics

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

The description adds useful behavioral detail beyond the annotations: the date-range limit of 100 days and the guarantee that it returns only WeChat's original columns without inventing metrics. This complements the read-only and non-destructive hints already provided.

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?

Two sentences deliver the core purpose and a key behavioral guarantee with no fluff. The description is front-loaded and every clause earns its place.

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 tool with five parameters, no output schema, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential context: what the tool does, the date-range limit, and the return behavior. It lacks mention of pagination or response_format options, but the schema provides those details, so the description is sufficient for selection and basic invocation.

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 description adds a meaningful constraint on begin_date/end_date by noting the maximum range of 100 days, which is not in the schema. However, it does not elaborate on limit, offset, or response_format, leaving those parameters to be understood from defaults and naming. Schema coverage for these parameters is low (40%), so the description only partially compensates.

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 reads the currently logged-in account's official exported article analytics, using a specific verb ('read') and a well-defined resource. It also distinguishes from siblings by focusing on article analytics as opposed to follower reports or article content.

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 clear context by specifying the scope (current account, fixed date range up to 100 days) and the nature of the data (exported article analytics). However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, though the sibling tool names imply distinct use cases.

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