select_quick_test_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully convey behavioral traits. It mentions the action (pick keywords) and that it 'kicks off the main analysis pass,' but it does not disclose side effects (e.g., state changes, idempotency, or reversibility). The description is too brief for a tool with no annotation support.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the precondition and succinctly describes the action. Every part contributes value, with no unnecessary words.

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 low parameter count and absence of annotations or output schema, the description covers the essential workflow context. However, it lacks details about return values, error conditions, or effects on the quick test state, which would improve completeless for a task-oriented agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. The description only restates the array constraint (1–5 keywords) already present in the schema (minItems, maxItems). It adds no meaning for 'testId' or 'keywords' values, failing to provide new information.

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 the tool's purpose: selecting 1-5 keywords for in-depth analysis after a quick test reaches a specific state. It uses a specific verb ('pick') and resource ('keywords'), and the context differentiates it from sibling tools like add_keyword or get_quick_test.

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 provides a clear precondition ('After a quick test reaches awaiting_keyword_selection') indicating when to use the tool. While it does not explicitly exclude alternatives, the context implies the correct workflow stage, making it easy for an agent to apply.

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