List Sponsored Products keywords

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds minimal extra behavioral insight (e.g., what attributes are returned). It does not disclose any additional traits like rate limits or data freshness, but the annotations sufficiently cover the read-only nature.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and key details. Every word contributes meaning without redundancy or fluff.

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 no output schema, the description provides reasonable context by listing returned attributes (match types, bids, states) and pagination. It could mention expected response structure more explicitly, but overall it is adequate for a simple listing tool with annotations.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds limited new meaning beyond the schema. It mentions filtering and pagination but does not elaborate on parameter relationships or specific formats, maintaining a baseline score.

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 lists Sponsored Products keywords, specifies version (v3), and mentions key attributes (match types, bids, states). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like sp_list_ad_groups or sp_list_campaigns by focusing on keywords.

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 on filtering (by campaignIds or adGroupIds) and pagination (with nextToken), helping the agent understand how to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusionary guidance.

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