amazon ads get keywords

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value with pagination semantics and the 'configuration records, not performance metrics' caveat, but says nothing about what the returned entity records contain or ordering, leaving the behavioral picture thin beyond annotations.

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?

Three short sentences with zero filler; scope and pagination caveat come first, and the metrics disclaimer is a single compact clause. Every sentence carries distinct information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and the description covers the two things the schema cannot: page-not-total pagination and record type. It is essentially complete for an annotated read-only list tool, with only the keyword-vs-target boundary left unaddressed.

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 every parameter including states, nextToken, maxResults and campaignIds is already documented at the field level. The description only restates the archived/paused default that the schema already declares, adding no syntax or constraint detail.

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 and resource ('Read one page of Amazon Sponsored Products keywords'), and the 'Sponsored Products' qualifier separates it from the Sponsored Brands/Display keyword and target siblings. It stops short of clarifying the keyword-vs-target distinction that an agent choosing among get_targets/get_negative_keywords would need.

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?

Gives concrete invocation guidance: continue with nextToken until absent, and warns that one page is not an account total. It also frames the use case by excluding performance analysis ('not performance metrics'), implicitly routing metrics work to the reporting tools, though it never names that alternative.

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