keyso_get_report_simple_organic_lost_pages

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates it's a GET request and shows query parameters, but it doesn't describe the response structure, pagination behavior, authentication requirements (though token parameter exists), or any limitations. The example is the only behavioral hint.

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 extremely concise: a title line, method, path, and a single example. It front-loads the intent and avoids redundancy. It could be considered under-specified, but it earns points for efficiency and no wasted 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?

For a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description is minimal. It doesn't explain what 'lost pages' means, what the response contains, or any constraints. The example is helpful but doesn't substitute for a high-level explanation. Overall, it's incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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 100% description coverage, so all parameters are already documented. The description adds no extra meaning beyond illustrating parameter usage in a sample URL. The baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 states 'Органическая выдача - Потерянные страницы' (Organic results - Lost pages) and provides the endpoint path, making it clear this tool retrieves lost pages from organic search. It distinguishes from siblings like 'lost_keywords' or 'sitepages' by the 'lost_pages' suffix, though it doesn't explicitly phrase it as a query command.

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 is given on when to use this tool over alternatives. It only shows an example request, leaving the agent to infer usage context from the name and path. There's no mention of typical scenarios or exclusions.

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