list_keywords

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. The description states the action and fields but does not explicitly disclose read-only behavior, pagination, or other side effects. The word 'List' implies a safe read operation, but this is not stated.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

The tool has an output schema (though not shown), so return values are covered. The description adds field specificity but misses explaining account_id and does not offer usage differentiation from siblings. It is adequate for a low-complexity list tool but has clear gaps.

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%, so the description must explain both parameters. It implicitly explains ad_group_id via 'in an ad group' but completely omits account_id, which is required. The schema titles help but are not sufficient compensation for the missing parameter guidance.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('keywords in an ad group'), and enumerates the fields returned. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_negative_keywords and list_ad_groups.

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?

Usage context is implied ('in an ad group') but no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. With siblings like list_negative_keywords, mentioning when to choose this tool over alternatives would improve clarity.

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