kwfinder_export_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It only states the high-level action without mentioning potential side effects, authentication requirements, file handling behavior, or whether the export is synchronous or asynchronous, leaving the agent with no insight into the tool's operational traits.

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 wasted words, which is concise. However, it is so terse that it omits essential context, making it under-specified for a tool with generic parameters. It is efficient but not appropriately sized for the complexity.

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 and no annotations, the description must explain return values and behavioral expectations. It does not mention what the CSV will contain, how to specify the keyword source, or any post-export actions. This is a serious gap for a meaningful export tool, especially given the generic body/query parameters.

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 description covers both parameters (body and query) with generic descriptions, achieving 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no specific parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides, leaving the agent without guidance on what to actually include in the query or body for this export.

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 'Export' and the resource 'keywords', with a specific output format 'CSV file'. It is distinct from sibling tools by indicating an export action for keywords, but it does not elaborate on the source or scope of the keywords, so it falls short of a perfect 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kwfinder_lists or other export-related tools. The description does not mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or when a different tool would be more appropriate.

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