search_keywords_partner

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe read-only behavior. The description adds transparency by specifying it is an aggregate and that certain parameters are ignored, which is valuable beyond the annotations.

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 well-structured, front-loading the purpose and return shape, then detailing filter behavior and linking to the spec. While informative, it could be slightly more concise by omitting the full output shape example.

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 output schema, the description provides a complete return structure. It explains the behavior of all parameters and the aggregate nature, ensuring the agent understands the tool's full capabilities and constraints.

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% with clear descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by explicitly clarifying which parameters are effective (aggregation, startDate, endDate) and which are ignored, providing context not in 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?

The description clearly states the tool returns 'Top search keywords across all the partner's apps (developer-space wide).' It specifies the scope ('partner's apps' vs. single app, distinguishing from siblings like search_keywords_by_app) and provides the exact return shape.

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 mentions valid filters (aggregation/startDate/endDate) and explicitly states that pagination/productId/hosting are ignored, clarifying correct usage. However, it does not explicitly advise when to use this tool over alternatives like search_keywords_by_app, though the context implies partner-level analysis.

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