gold_cluster

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose important non-obvious constraints: paid-only at PRO $29 with no free tier, and Hebrew-language keyword scope. It does not describe the output shape or side effects, but the essential access and input constraints are covered.

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 main purpose is front-loaded in a compact sentence, followed by a clear pricing caveat. Every clause adds relevant information, though the pricing warning could have been expressed slightly more compactly.

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 description covers the algorithm, threshold, language, and paid access, which covers most invocation needs for a two-parameter tool. However, there is no output schema and no mention of what the returned clusters look like, nor is there guidance about how this tool relates to sibling keyword tools.

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_description_coverage is 100%, so the baseline applies. The description adds helpful context about Hebrew keywords and Jaccard word-overlap semantics, but does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 states a concrete operation ('groups Hebrew keywords by word overlap') and identifies the algorithm (Jaccard clustering) with a threshold. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like gold_keyword_expand or gold_keyword_gap_scan.

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?

Usage is implied by the phrase 'Jaccard keyword clustering' — an agent can infer it should be used when grouping Hebrew keywords by overlap is needed. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives guidance or mention of what not to use it for.

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