get_keywords

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It does not disclose that this is a read-only operation, mention pagination (though 'limit' implies it), or note any rate limits or prerequisites. The description is too brief for safe invocation.

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 very concise—a single sentence. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, lacking behavioral details. It is well-structured but could include more information without losing conciseness.

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 complexity (4 parameters, no annotations, but output schema exists), the description is incomplete. It lacks pagination details, usage guidance, and behavioral context. The output schema covers return values, but the description does not supplement the structured fields adequately.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value: it mentions the match type filter, which is already described in the schema. No additional semantics are provided for other parameters.

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 clear verb ('Retrieve') and resource ('keywords from an ad group'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'create_keyword'. However, it implies ad group scoping even though 'ad_group_id' is optional, causing slight ambiguity about whether it can retrieve all keywords for a customer.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'generate_keyword_ideas' or 'get_search_terms'. The agent must infer from the name alone.

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