keyword_insights

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It mentions using the iTunes Search API but does not disclose authentication requirements, rate limits, or whether the tool is read-only. Behavioral traits like potential side effects are missing.

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 two sentences long, front-loading the purpose and key outputs. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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?

While the description covers purpose and data source, it lacks details on return format, caching behavior, or result limits. For a tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, it is adequate but not thorough.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning beyond the schema descriptions for both 'app_id' and 'extra_keywords'. The schema already states 'Extra comma-separated keywords to analyze beyond current metadata' for extra_keywords.

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 verb 'analyze', the resource 'your app's keywords', and the outputs 'difficulty, competing apps, and budget usage'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'competitor_snapshot' by specifying keyword competition analysis.

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 implies usage for keyword analysis but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like 'competitor_snapshot' or 'app_details'. No exclusions or conditions are provided.

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