SEO text analysis

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

The description adds some behavioral context beyond the annotations by warning that the operation may consume SEO Intellect account limits and by identifying the upstream API. It does not describe the task lifecycle, whether results are returned synchronously or via task_id, or any other side effects, so the coverage is only partial.

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 two short sentences with the core purpose front-loaded. The upstream API note and account-limit warning are useful operational context and do not add unnecessary bulk.

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?

The schema is complex, with an anyOf that supports both starting a task and polling an existing task, and there is no output schema. The description does not explain how results are returned, when an agent should use the task_id variant, or what the typical response shape is, leaving important invocation context 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?

The input schema already has descriptive coverage for all parameters, including wait_for_result, timeout_ms, poll_interval_ms, and task_id. The tool description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Measure') and the resource ('competitor text sizes') and identifies the SERP as the data source, so an agent can infer the core function. It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like text_analyze or competitors, but the function is concrete enough to be recognizable.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over its siblings, and no alternative tools are named. The only operational note is that it may consume account limits, which is a caution rather than a usage criterion.

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