keywords_suggestions

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states the data source but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, data freshness, return format, or whether multiple calls are needed for different sources.

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, clear sentence without unnecessary words. It is concise, but could be slightly restructured to front-load the primary action and include brief context on output.

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 no output schema, the description should hint at the return structure or provide usage context. It states the sources but omits details like number of suggestions, format, or limitations. Adequate but could be improved.

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 coverage is 100%, with both parameters having descriptions. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema; it does not explain how the parameters affect the suggestions (e.g., country affects localization). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'keyword suggestions', and the specific sources 'Google Autocomplete and People Also Ask'. It distinguishes from siblings like keywords_cluster or keywords_gaps by specifying the data source.

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 implies usage for keyword suggestion generation but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like keywords_search_console or keywords_gaps. No exclusion criteria or usage context is given.

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