Score an ASO keyword

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds context (iOS App Store scope) but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the key action 'Estimate difficulty and opportunity'. No redundant information or unnecessary detail. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description lacks explanation of the output (e.g., difficulty score range, opportunity metric). With no output schema, the agent cannot infer what the tool returns. The tool has 4 parameters and moderate complexity, so the description is insufficiently complete.

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% (2 of 4 parameters have schema descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema; it mentions 'country' and 'language' but no detail on values or defaults. Baseline is 3 for moderate coverage.

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 title 'Score an ASO keyword' and description 'Estimate difficulty and opportunity for one iOS App Store keyword in a country and language' clearly specify the verb (estimate), resource (keyword difficulty), and scope (iOS App Store, one keyword). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_app_detail or search_apps.

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 research on the iOS App Store, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it provide conditions or exclusions. No guidance on when not to use or prerequisites is given.

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