List DataDive Niches

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

Annotations already include readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable context beyond that: what a Niche represents, the return fields (nicheId, heroKeyword, etc.), and pagination metadata. This helps the agent understand the tool's output and behavior without contradicting the read-only hint.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with usage guidance, then a clear statement of purpose, followed by return details. Every sentence contributes value with no fluff or repetition.

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 simple read-only list tool, the description covers purpose, usage, return values, and pagination semantics. The schema covers parameters, and annotations cover safety. No significant gaps remain, especially given no output schema is present.

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% for both parameters (pageSize and currentPage), so the schema fully documents them. The description mentions pagination generically but does not add syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves a paginated list of Niches, which is a specific verb+resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools by explaining it's the entry point for finding nicheId used by get_niche_keywords, get_niche_competitors, and get_ranking_juice.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this first when the user asks about their niches, or to find a nicheId for use with...' which provides clear when-to-use context. It names related tools that consume the nicheId, but does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or provide an alternative for listing niches (e.g., get_niche_roots).

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