semrush_domain_rank_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation hints, such as what 'historical ranking data' includes (e.g., time range, granularity) or any side effects.

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 sentence, very concise. However, it is too terse, sacrificing necessary detail for brevity. It is front-loaded with the core purpose but lacks completeness.

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?

Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, the description severely under-informs. It does not explain what 'historical ranking' entails, time range, database meaning, limit behavior, or return format. Incomplete for effective tool use.

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 parameters. It does not describe any parameter: domain (required but self-explanatory?), database (default 'us' - what does 'us' mean?), limit (exclusiveMinimum - what does it limit?). No added meaning beyond the schema.

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 specific verb 'Get' and resource 'historical ranking data for a domain'. It clearly states the tool's function but does not differentiate from siblings like semrush_domain_rank (current rank) or semrush_subdomain_rank_history.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools include many ranking-related tools with similar names (e.g., semrush_domain_rank, semrush_subdomain_rank_history), and the description offers no criteria for choosing this one.

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