get_top_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It notes pagination (behavioral) but omits other critical behaviors like authentication, rate limits, data freshness, or whether this is a read-only operation. The lack of mutation warnings is acceptable given the 'get_' prefix, but more transparency would help.

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 short (one line) and front-loads the purpose. However, the comma-separated list of features ('period-over-period, branded filter, paginated') is cryptic and could be broken into clearer statements. No wasted words, but the brevity sacrifices clarity.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain return format, how pagination works, what 'branded filter' means, and how to specify the period. It also lacks required parameter info despite schema allowing any properties. The tool may expect inputs, but they are undocumented.

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?

The input schema has no defined properties (additionalProperties: true), so the description adds context by listing implied parameters: period-over-period comparison, branded filter, and pagination. However, it does not specify parameter names, types, or formats. Since schema coverage is effectively 0% for defined parameters, the description provides some but insufficient detail.

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 it retrieves top keywords with specific metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, position) and mentions filtering by branded and pagination. It distinguishes from siblings like get_keyword_detail (which targets individual keywords) and list_keywords_for_page (which links keywords to a specific page). However, it could explicitly state that it is a read operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., compare_date_ranges, get_keyword_detail). The description does not mention prerequisites, session requirements, or when not to use it. The sibling context exists but the description itself provides no usage direction.

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