wordstat_query

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds significant behavioral context: it details the return structure (dict with specific keys), explains error behavior (isError: True on failure), and provides examples. This goes well beyond the annotations, earning a high score.

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 concise yet comprehensive. It starts with a clear purpose statement, followed by use cases and exclusions, return format, and examples. Every sentence is informative and earned its place. The structure is well-organized and front-loaded.

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 tool has 4 parameters (all documented) and no formal output schema, the description provides a complete picture: purpose, usage guidelines, parameter details with examples, return structure, and error handling. It fully equips an agent to use the tool correctly.

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% with all parameters described. The description adds extra value beyond the schema: it explains Yandex operators for the query parameter, gives specific region ID examples (213=Moscow), and clarifies the meaning of history_period options. This additional context enriches understanding.

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's purpose: "Get Yandex Wordstat frequency for a keyword phrase." It specifies the resource (Yandex Wordstat) and the action (get frequency). It distinguishes from siblings like yandex_search and google_search by explicitly noting it is for keyword research and Yandex-specific, thus avoiding confusion.

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 explicitly tells when to use the tool (keyword research, demand validation, seasonality analysis, long-tail discovery) and when not to use it (Google volume, for which it directs to Google Keyword Planner or third-party tools). It also clarifies the market scope (Russian/Yandex-speaking markets).

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