direct.hf.report_keywords

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only 'Human-friendly' and 'preset', which are vague and do not disclose what the preset includes, default date ranges, or any behavioral quirks. It falls short of adding useful context beyond the annotations.

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 short phrase, so it is concise and front-loaded. However, it is under-specified rather than purposefully concise, and the phrase 'Human-friendly' is filler that does not earn 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?

Given the tool has 5 parameters, low schema description coverage, and many sibling report tools, the description is incomplete. Although an output schema exists (so return values need not be explained) and annotations cover safety, the lack of parameter meaning and usage guidance leaves the agent without enough to invoke 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 5 parameters with only 40% description coverage, and the tool description mentions none of them. Critical parameters like date_from, date_to, and campaign_id have no documentation in either the schema or the description. The description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 states it is a keyword report preset, which identifies the resource (keywords) and the preset nature. However, it lacks a specific verb and mostly restates the tool name, leaving the exact action vague. It does distinguish it from direct.report by the 'preset' qualifier, but only marginally.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as direct.report or direct.hf.report_ads. There is no mention of prerequisites, appropriate contexts, or exclusions. The phrase 'Human-friendly' does not clarify usage.

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