get_cluster_keywords

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

With no annotations, it discloses read-only status, zero credit cost, and pagination behavior including page.has_more/next_offset. This adds useful operational context, though it omits auth or error behavior.

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?

Very concise and front-loaded: purpose first, then cost/safety, then prerequisite and pagination. No wasted words.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but the description leaves most parameters undocumented for a 6-param tool with no annotations. It is minimally sufficient to invoke with defaults but incomplete for full correct usage.

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 0%, so the description must explain six parameters. It only identifies cluster_key's source and implies pagination via limit/offset, leaving days, country, project_id, and explicit pagination parameters undocumented.

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 the resource precisely: keywords of one cluster, with metrics and pagination. The mention of cluster_key from get_gsc_clusters distinguishes it from cluster-listing tools and general keyword tools.

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?

Tells the agent where to get the required cluster_key (get_gsc_clusters), which establishes usage flow. It does not state when to prefer this over get_keywords or when not to use it.

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