trending_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return shape and the parameter default, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, ordering, limits, or authentication requirements. For a simple query tool, this is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise, using three short sentences to convey the core purpose, the parameter, and the return format. There is no redundancy or 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?

For a tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it returns, the parameter meaning, the default, and the output element shape. It omits specifics like result count or sort order, but those are not critical for a simple trending endpoint.

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 schema provides only the type and default for range_in_days. The description adds meaningful semantic context by explaining it as the number of days over which the trend is computed and repeating the default, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage.

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 identifies the resource (top trending search terms) and the output format ({keyword, score}). It distinguishes from siblings like search and search_suggest by the word 'trending', though it opens with a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb.

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 context is clear: use this tool to retrieve trending search terms over a configurable number of days. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling list contains obviously different search-related tools, so an agent can infer when this one applies.

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