add_scheduled_keyword

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects like duplicate handling, whether the keyword appends or replaces existing ones, or any required authorization. The one-line description leaves significant behavioral expectations unspecified.

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 a single, concise sentence with no extraneous content. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity, though the front-loaded information is minimal.

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 simple add operation, this description is minimally viable alongside a well-covered schema. However, it lacks context about return values, edge cases, or how it fits into the broader scheduled release workflow. Sibling tools add similar visual and subject keywords, so some contextual guidance would improve completeness.

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 input schema has 100% parameter description coverage, so the schema already documents each parameter. The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond the schema, such as how 'url' interacts with 'keyword'. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the action ('Add') and the target resource ('keyword to a scheduled release order'), matching the tool name and schema. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'add_first_release_keyword' or 'add_scheduled_subject', which could cause ambiguity in selection.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'add_first_release_keyword' or 'add_scheduled_subject'. The description merely states the operation without any contextual cues, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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