list_keywords

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It states the tool is read-only, requires ASA authentication, returns keyword metadata (text, match type, bid amount, status), and supports pagination with default and maximum limits. However, it does not cover possible error conditions or rate limits.

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 paragraph that front-loads the purpose, then covers constraints, alternatives, and pagination details. Every sentence adds essential information with no 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?

Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description covers the main functional aspects: purpose, return content, authentication, pagination, and differentiation from related tools. It could have mentioned the response structure or error handling, but it is fairly complete for a listing tool.

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?

All parameters are described in the input schema with full coverage. The description adds value by explaining authentication requirements and pagination defaults, though it does not provide additional semantic depth beyond what the schema already offers.

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 lists targeting keywords for a specific Apple Search Ads ad group, using specific verbs and identifying the resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_keyword_report.

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 clear context: it is read-only, requires ASA authentication, and explicitly mentions that performance metrics should be retrieved using get_keyword_report. It also explains pagination limits, giving good guidance on when to use the tool.

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