google_ads_search_terms_analyze

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It declares 'Read-only', details the exact return structure, and explains candidate semantics (e.g., keyword_candidates with CV>0 and not registered, negative_candidates top 20 by cost with conversions=0). This is thorough behavioral disclosure.

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 dense but every sentence serves a distinct purpose: purpose, return shape, read-only status, and sibling differentiation. No filler or redundant information.

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?

With no output schema, the description fully specifies the return contract, including nested ngram_distribution top-10s and candidate filter criteria. It also provides alternative tool pointers, making it complete for an analysis tool.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions, including campaign_id format and period enums. The description itself does not need to add parameter meaning; it complements the schema by specifying the output shape.

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 opens with a specific verb ('Analyze') and identifies the resource ('keyword/search-term overlap and N-gram distribution for a Google Ads campaign'). It explicitly names sibling alternatives in the final sentence, distinguishing it from google_ads_search_terms_review and google_ads_search_terms_report.

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?

It explicitly states when to use this tool versus alternatives: 'For rule-scored add/exclude/watch buckets use google_ads_search_terms_review; for the raw unscored term log use google_ads_search_terms_report.' The schema description also adds period-selection guidance for recent changes versus trend baselines.

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