get_keywords_scrap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Extract keywords' without mentioning any traits like whether it's a read-only operation, requires authentication, has rate limits, or what the output format might be. This is inadequate for a tool with unknown behavior.

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 with a single phrase, 'Extraire les mots-clés', which is front-loaded and wastes no words. However, this conciseness comes at the cost of being under-specified, but it earns full points for brevity and structure.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and low parameter coverage, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool does beyond a basic verb, how to use it, what the parameters mean, or what to expect in return, making it inadequate for effective tool invocation.

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 has 1 parameter with 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no information about the 'keywords' parameter (e.g., what it represents, format, or examples). This fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation, leaving the parameter's meaning unclear.

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 'Extraire les mots-clés' (Extract keywords) states a basic action but is vague about what resource it operates on and how it differs from sibling tools like 'get_keywords_find' or 'get_keywords_related'. It restates the tool name's intent without specifying context or scope, making it minimally informative but lacking differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_keywords_find' or 'get_keywords_related'. The description offers no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent with no usage direction.

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