get_search_terms

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It mentions the tool is read-only and a stub, but it does not disclose other behavioral aspects like pagination, rate limits, authentication requirements, or the impact of parameters. Important details are missing.

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, consisting of two short sentences. It front-loads the purpose and includes a critical caveat about the tool's availability, making every word count.

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 (7 parameters, all optional, no output schema) and the large sibling list, the description is insufficient. It lacks explanation of the output format, how parameters like filters are used, and how this tool differs from other search-term tools.

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 parameters. The description adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what is in the schema, such as the meaning of filters or the acceptable range for limit.

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 that the tool retrieves customer search terms that triggered ads, specifying it as a read operation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate it from sibling tools like get_search_query_performance or get_search_query_ad_coverage, which could be confused.

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 warns that the tool is only available as a hosted endpoint and that the local server is a stub, but it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other search-related tools in the sibling list.

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