Research a trend

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 transparently discloses partial failure behavior and the error field in results, but it does not explicitly state whether the tool is read-only or whether any destructive side effects exist.

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 compact and well-structured: the first sentence states the core value, the second gives the recommended usage, and the third sets expectations about partial results. No superfluous details are present.

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?

There is no output schema, but the description sufficiently conveys what data categories to expect and how errors are handled. It does not enumerate exact output fields, but given the composite nature and the lack of output schema, the provided context is adequate.

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 already covers both parameters well, so the baseline is 3. The description adds valuable guidance by advising that passing a topic id from search_topics yields materially better numbers, which meaningfully supplements the schema.

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?

Clearly states the tool returns a composite view (interest over time, popularity by region, related searches) in a single call, and differentiates it from narrow single-purpose sibling tools. The phrase 'Full picture of one term' succinctly captures the intended resource.

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 when to use this tool ('when the user asks to research, analyse, or look into a topic') and contrasts it with asking a narrow question. It also notes the efficiency benefit of saving three round trips, though it does not name the alternative sibling tools directly.

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