Suggest keywords

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe, external-call nature is covered. The description adds only that results include 'monthly views', a useful return-content hint, but stops short of anything about volume limits, latency, or match types.

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?

A single, tight sentence with the input source and output attribute front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though minimal enough that it could have added one clause of routing guidance at little cost.

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 one-parameter read tool with annotations covering the safety profile, the description gives the essential input->output picture ('seed keywords' -> 'suggestions with monthly views'). With no output schema, more detail on the returned fields would help, but nothing critical is missing.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load; 'from seed keywords' clearly identifies the meaning of the single required param (seeds the suggestion engine). It does not mention the array shape or the 1–1000 item bound, but the core semantic is conveyed.

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?

States a specific verb (Get/suggest) and resource (keyword suggestions) plus the key output attribute ('monthly views') and input source ('seed keywords'). It does not, however, differentiate itself from the nearby sibling reddit_ads_validate_keywords, leaving the agent to infer the distinction.

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is present. The obvious sibling reddit_ads_validate_keywords (keyword validation vs. keyword discovery) is never mentioned, so the agent gets no routing help.

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