semrush_subfolder_adwords
Retrieve paid keywords for a subfolder to analyze PPC strategies and improve ad targeting.
Instructions
Get paid keywords for a subfolder
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subfolder | Yes | ||
| database | No | us | |
| limit | No |
Retrieve paid keywords for a subfolder to analyze PPC strategies and improve ad targeting.
Get paid keywords for a subfolder
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| subfolder | Yes | ||
| database | No | us | |
| limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., data freshness, pagination), but does not contradict annotations.
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, which is concise but under-specified. It could be expanded to include more detail without becoming verbose.
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 3 undocumented parameters, the description is inadequate. It neither describes what the tool returns nor provides enough context for correct usage.
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%, and the description provides no explanation for any of the three parameters (subfolder, database, limit). The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.
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 'Get paid keywords for a subfolder' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('paid keywords for a subfolder'), making the purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like 'semrush_subfolder_adwords_unique' or 'semrush_subdomain_adwords'.
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, nor any context about prerequisites or limitations. The description is purely functional with no usage context.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/mrkooblu/semrush-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server