get_search_terms

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by listing return fields (search term, campaign, etc.), extending beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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 three sentences: purpose, use case, return fields. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff, earning its place efficiently.

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 is simple but missing parameter details. Despite having output schema context, the description lists return fields, partially compensating. Parameter semantics are absent, making it only minimally complete.

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 0%, and the description provides no information on the three parameters. It does not clarify formats, defaults, or required status, leaving the agent to infer semantics.

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 defines the tool as retrieving search terms reports, specifying the resource and action. It mentions its utility for negative keyword discovery, but does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like discover_keywords.

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 negative keyword analysis but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No when-not-to-use or sibling comparisons are provided.

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