create_keyword_cluster

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

With no annotations provided, the description discloses that keywords not yet existing are auto-created as target keywords, and that the tool returns keywords_assigned and keywords_created counts. It does not cover all edge cases (e.g., error handling, idempotency), but the core behavioral traits are clearly stated.

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 three concise paragraphs with no wasted words. The first sentence immediately states the tool's action, and critical usage tips (keywords array, return counts) are front-loaded. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 the tool's complexity (11 parameters, 1 required) and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the main purpose, auto-creation behavior, and return values. It lacks details on error handling or idempotency but is reasonably complete for typical use.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds context about auto-creation of keywords and return counts but does not significantly enhance parameter-level understanding beyond what the schema already provides.

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 that the tool creates a strategic keyword cluster with keywords in a single call, grouping related keywords by search intent and serving as a content brief. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like suggest_keywords (suggestion) or get_keyword_clusters (retrieval).

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 advises using this tool during keyword research conversations to organize findings into actionable clusters, and explicitly instructs to always include the keywords array. It provides context but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives when not to use.

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