pinterest_get_keyword_intelligence

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It explicitly signals a read-only operation with 'Read' and adds one useful constraint: country metrics accept up to 2,000 keywords per request. However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or mode-to-parameter prerequisites.

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 two tight sentences: the first identifies the core scope and modes, and the second adds the most operationally important limit. There is no filler or redundancy.

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 13-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and zero schema description coverage, this description is not complete enough for correct invocation. It does not specify which parameters each mode requires, what the response contains, or how pagination works.

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%, and the description does little to compensate for the 13 undocumented parameters. It references the modes and mentions the keywords limit, but does not explain how mode, term, terms, keywords, adGroupId, campaignId, countryCode, matchTypes, or bookmark relate to each other or when each is required.

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 uses the specific verb 'Read' and names concrete resources: assigned targeting keywords, country-level keyword metrics, suggested terms, and related terms. It is clear about what the tool returns, though it does not explicitly distinguish these from sibling tools like pinterest_get_targeting_options or pinterest_get_trends.

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?

The description provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, and does not state which mode serves which use case. The mode enum in the schema hints at variants, but the description itself gives no context for choosing among them.

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