keywords_save

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

The description goes well beyond the annotations by explaining deduplication by normalized phrase, case/whitespace insensitivity, overwrite behavior for non-empty fields, and source merging. This gives the agent a clear model of what happens on conflict, which is critical for a write operation.

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?

Two tight sentences with no filler. The core action and path are front-loaded, followed immediately by the deduplication and overwrite rules. Every sentence earns 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?

The description is sufficient for a moderately complex merge operation, especially since an output schema exists. It covers destination, conflict resolution, and source handling. It could optionally mention when to use this versus keywords_load, but that is not essential for invoking 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?

Schema coverage is 67%, and the description adds meaningful semantics by explaining that project and lang form the CSV path and that rows are merged with deduplication and field-overwrite behavior. This clarifies the 'rows' parameter more than the raw schema does.

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 ('Merge') and resource ('keyword rows into the project's CSV store'), with an explicit path template. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling read/expansion tools and from keywords_load, which likely reads the same store.

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 usage: call this when you want to save or merge keyword rows into the project CSV. However, it does not explicitly say when not to use it or mention alternatives like keywords_load for reading, so usage guidance is only implied rather than directly stated.

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