list_niche_analyses

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

The description adds context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by stating it consumes no niche-analysis quota and returns only summary rows (not clusters/keywords). This matches the annotation without contradiction, and enriches the safety profile.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences that cover purpose, usage, safety, and return format without fluff. Every phrase earns its place.

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 simple list operation with two optional parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers what it returns, its read-only nature, quota-free status, and pagination. It leaves no critical gaps.

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%, so both parameters (page, per_page) are already documented. The description only reiterates that pagination is via page and per_page, adding marginal meaning. Per rubric, baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already handles parameter semantics.

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 previously run niche analyses, specifying the fields returned (topic, store, country, etc.), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like run_niche_analysis by explicitly contrasting listing vs. running.

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?

It provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: 'call it before run_niche_analysis to check whether a topic was already covered.' It also notes it's read-only and free, which helps the agent decide between this and quota-consuming alternatives.

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