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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint/destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: the auth requirement (Cotlet API key with access) and the hard data start date of 1 Jan 2025, both of which affect whether a call is worthwhile.

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 core content is repeated verbatim: 'TPT search keywords that led buyers to your products, with visits, conversions and earnings' appears in both the first and second sentences. The date-boundary and product_id notes are front-loaded fine, but the redundancy costs it.

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 read-only analytics read with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers the return fields, scoping parameter, auth requirement and data availability window. Only the sibling-routing context is absent, leaving a small gap.

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 100%, so the schema already documents from/to/product_id. The description corroborates product_id's scoping effect ('one listing'), but adds no format or boundary detail beyond what the schema states. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb+resource (get search keywords) and enumerates what the result contains (visits, conversions, earnings). An agent can identify it as a search-analytics retrieval tool. It doesn't distinguish itself from siblings like get_product_stats or get_store_stats, keeping it at 4 rather than 5.

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?

It offers a conditional hint ('Pass product_id to see the keywords of one listing') and a data-availability boundary ('Search Analytics starts on 1 Jan 2025'), which imply usage. But there is no explicit when-to-use-this vs alternatives guidance against the other TPT stats tools, so it stays at minimum-viable.

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