Google search keywords

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is complemented by detailed behavioral disclosures: a 10-day data lag warning, incomplete current-month data, and specific error handling (RATE_LIMITED, NOT_FOUND, structuredContent.errorCode/retryable). This goes beyond the annotation to inform the agent of important runtime behaviors.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by two well-structured bullet sections for data lag and error handling. It is somewhat long but every sentence conveys necessary operational details without redundancy.

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 covers the main operation, data freshness caveats, and error handling, while the output schema presumably documents return values. Given the moderate complexity and rich annotations/schema, it is adequately complete, though it does not discuss alternative tools or specific use cases.

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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description only mentions storeId briefly ('if storeId provided'), adding no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Fetch Google keywords for all locations, or a single location if storeId provided,' specifying the action (Fetch), resource (Google keywords), and scope (all or single location). This distinguishes it from sibling tools such as get_google_insights or get_google_reviews.

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 gives context that the tool can fetch keywords for all locations or a single one via storeId, but it does not explicitly compare with or exclude other tools like insights or reviews. Usage is implied rather than explicitly guided.

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