Search Threads

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. Description adds transparency about resource consumption: 'Spends ScrapeCreators credits (~1).' and specifies the exact JSON structure returned. No contradictions with 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?

Description is concise with two sentences covering all essential aspects: platform, action, purpose, return format, and credit cost. No redundant or unnecessary words; information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, output schema present, rich annotations), the description covers purpose, return format, and cost. It could briefly mention rate limits or pagination (though 'limit' parameter is in schema) but overall is adequate.

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 baseline is 3. Description does not add new information about parameters beyond what the schema provides; it only mentions the keyword search operation and output format, not parameter usage or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states 'Organic Threads keyword search' specifying the platform (Threads), type (short-form text/social posts), and purpose (trend + voice research). It also details the return format, effectively distinguishing from sibling search tools like search_tiktok and search_instagram.

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?

Description implies usage for keyword-based trend and voice research but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., search_tiktok, search_instagram) or any prerequisites or limitations. No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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