Conduct deep keyword and domain research to uncover SEO opportunities, monetization insights, and strategic recommendations through multi-step AI analysis.
Deep keyword and domain research with SEO analysis, monetization insights, and strategic recommendations through multi-step AI analysis powered by GPT-5-nano (~20 credits)
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| keyword | Yes | ||
| detailed | No | ||
| provider | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. 'Multi-step AI analysis powered by GPT-5-nano' and the credit cost are useful transparency signals, but nothing is said about latency, output structure, whether analysis is deterministic, or what happens with the 'detailed' and 'provider' flags.
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?
A single dense sentence with no padding; the capability list and model/cost metadata are front-loaded. It is efficient, though the list-of-outputs phrasing verges on marketing filler.
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?
For a 3-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description leaves the agent without parameter meaning, output expectations, or reporting format. Only the cost and model note add real context.
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 mentions none of the three parameters. The agent cannot learn from either source what 'detailed' toggles or what 'provider' accepts, and there is no enum hint to constrain provider values.
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?
States a specific verb+resource (keyword and domain research) plus its intended outputs (SEO analysis, monetization insights, strategic recommendations). It does not compare itself to the sibling aaddyy_seo_analysis, whose scope overlaps, so sibling differentiation is missing despite an otherwise clear purpose.
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 when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use, and no mention of the overlapping aaddyy_seo_analysis sibling. The only hint of context is the (~20 credits) cost tag, which does not route the agent between alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.