kwfinder_list_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It only says 'Get items' with no mention of return format, pagination, error handling, or whether it is a read-only operation. The agent cannot infer safety or response details from the description alone.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no wasted words. It is efficient, though it borders on being too brief to be truly useful.

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 lacks an output schema and has a very thin description. The agent cannot anticipate what 'items' will contain (e.g., keyword metrics), whether pagination is involved, or any list-specific behavior. This is incomplete for a tool that likely returns a rich list of keyword data.

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 all parameters with descriptions (list_id, body, query), so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra parameter semantics beyond what the schema already states, but the schema is sufficient.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and resource 'items in a KWFinder list,' which clearly states the action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like kwfinder_lists (which likely returns lists themselves) by specifying 'items'. However, it doesn't elaborate on scope or variants, so it stops short of fully differentiating.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as kwfinder_lists, kwfinder_add_list_keywords, or kwfinder_create_list. The description simply states the action without any context about use cases or exclusions.

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