List niche analyses

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

Annotations already convey readOnlyHint/destructiveHint, but the description adds real value: it explains that it re-reads previously completed work, describes pagination behavior, and states the return scope is 'summary rows only, not the clusters and keywords themselves' — an important limit not in any structured field. Minor gaps (no rate limits or auth notes) keep it from 5.

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?

Three sentences, each doing distinct work: what it lists, pagination, and the usage/return-scope caveat. Front-loaded with the resource and returned fields; zero filler.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by naming the returned fields and clarifying that cluster/keyword detail is excluded, so an agent knows exactly what a call yields. Combined with the pre-run check guidance, nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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% and both parameters (page, per_page) are documented with defaults in the schema. The description only restates that pagination happens through page and per_page, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List the niche analyses previously run') and enumerates the returned fields (topic, store, country, lang, cluster count, keyword count, top opportunity score, creation date), which distinguishes it clearly from siblings like run_niche_analysis and list_keywords.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent when to call it: 'call it before run_niche_analysis to check whether a topic was already covered.' Names the alternative tool and the condition that selects this one, with no inference required.

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