Keyword volume history

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the tool shows trend and seasonality, implying a time series, but does not disclose output format, date range, data update frequency, or any limitations. It is under-specified for a tool with zero annotation support.

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 of 12 words that is front-loaded with the core purpose. It is clear, direct, and contains no filler or redundant phrasing.

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?

Without an output schema or behavioral guidance, the description is incomplete for practical use. It does not explain what the returned data looks like (e.g., a list of month/value pairs), how far back the history goes, or how the trend is presented. Given the presence of 15 sibling tools, more contextual detail is needed to differentiate and understand 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 50%, with only 'country' documented. The description adds semantic value to the 'keyword' parameter by stating it relates to 'search volume history for a keyword,' but it does not clarify the optional 'country' parameter behavior. The description partially compensates for the undocumented parameter.

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 clearly states the tool provides 'Monthly search volume history for a keyword' and explicitly mentions 'Shows trend and seasonality.' This goes beyond a simple restatement of the title, using specific verbs and resource scope that distinguishes it from siblings like keyword-volume-by-country or keyword-metrics.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It fails to mention that this is for historical/trend analysis as opposed to current metrics (keyword-metrics) or country-specific breakdowns (keyword-volume-by-country). No exclusions or prerequisite scenarios are provided.

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