keywords_load

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description need not repeat safety traits. It adds value by clarifying the operation is a filtered retrieval of saved keywords, but gives no additional behavior such as pagination, ordering, or empty-result handling. No contradiction with 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?

A single sentence that front-loads the core action and resource, then appends the optional filter conditions. Every word earns its place with no redundant filler.

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 load operation with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers purpose and filters adequately. The only material gap is explicit usage guidance versus alternative keyword-generation/save tools, which is not severe enough to lower the score further.

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 coverage is only 50% (tier and cluster have descriptions; project and lang do not), so the description partially compensates by identifying project/lang as the scoping keys and tier/cluster as optional filters. It adds relational meaning but no format or value details beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('Load') with a clear resource ('saved keywords for a project and language') and specifies optional filters. This differentiates it from key siblings like keywords_save (which saves rather than loads) and suggest/expand tools (which generate rather than retrieve stored data).

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 implies the tool is for retrieving previously saved keywords, so an agent can infer when to use it rather than keywords_save or suggestion tools. However, it offers no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use guidance or named alternatives, leaving some routing to inference.

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