smartscout_keyword_search

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing about pagination, result caps, rate limits, auth needs, or the shape of the response. It only hints at the metrics returned, leaving the read-only and non-destructive nature implicit in the verb 'search'.

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 short sentence with the key output metrics front-loaded and no filler, which is efficient. It is arguably too terse given the complexity of the sibling tool set, but there is no wasted text.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description should explain return shape and behavior, but it only names two metrics. It omits pagination, defaults, result ordering, and how the filter parameters combine, which is inadequate for a search tool in a large ambiguous tool family.

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 100%, so all four parameters (limit, maxCPC, keyword, minVolume) are already documented in the schema, which sets the baseline at 3. The description adds only a loose mapping of volume/CPC to the returned data, without clarifying filter semantics 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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (keywords) plus the returned data (search volume, CPC estimates), which is more informative than a bare restatement. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like smartscout_keyword_products or smartscout_product_keywords, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 statement of when to use this tool versus the many sibling keyword/product/brand tools, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The agent gets a capability statement but no routing guidance.

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