get_keywords_match

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention side effects, data requirements, rate limits, or any behavioral traits beyond the vague purpose.

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 extremely short (one phrase), which might seem concise, but it lacks substance. It fails to convey necessary details, making it under-specification rather than efficient conciseness.

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 22 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is severely incomplete. An agent cannot understand the tool's purpose, parameters, or behavior from this definition.

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 only 18%, meaning most parameters lack descriptions. The description does not add any information about what parameters like 'include', 'exclude', or range filters are used for, leaving agents underinformed.

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 'Obtenir la correspondance des mots-clés.' is vague; it does not specify what 'match' means or what the tool actually returns. Given the large set of sibling tools (e.g., get_keywords_find, get_keywords_similar), there is no differentiation, making it hard for an agent to select correctly.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool over its siblings or alternatives. There is no context about prerequisites, scenarios, or exclusions.

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