google_trends_status

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Merely says 'Check the status', without disclosing what 'status' means (e.g., API availability, latency, error codes) or any side effects. Lacks behavioral details needed for an agent to understand implications.

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?

Extremely concise (single sentence) but at the cost of missing critical information. It is front-loaded but too minimal to be effective. Every word earns its place, but the description is underspecified.

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?

Without output schema and with vague description, the agent has no idea what the tool returns. No explanation of return format, error handling, or relationship to sibling tools. Inadequate for informed tool selection and invocation.

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 coverage is 100%, but description adds no meaning to parameters (country, language). It fails to explain why a status check needs location codes or how they affect results, leaving the agent guessing about their role.

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?

Description states a specific verb ('Check') and resource ('Google Trends API status'), clearly indicating the tool's purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools (google_trends_questions, google_trends_trending) which likely focus on querying data rather than status.

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 vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where this status check is needed.

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