jackpotkeywords_audit

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: cost, refund policy on failure, latency (20-60s), scope of crawling (primary + up to 8 secondary pages), and what returns (checks, issues, gaps, recommendations).

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?

Very concise, front-loaded with purpose, structured with bullet-worthy details (cost, latency, refund). Every sentence adds essential information without 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?

Complete given the tool's simplicity (1 param) and presence of siblings. Covers purpose, exclusions, cost, latency, failure behavior, and output components. No output schema, but description sufficiently describes returns.

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% for the single 'url' parameter, providing baseline of 3. Description adds minimal value beyond the schema: gives examples of acceptable URL formats but does not add new semantic constraints.

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 'Run an SEO audit on a URL' and lists specific categories checked (technical, content, etc.) and outputs (scored checks, issues, recommendations). It explicitly differentiates from sibling jackpotkeywords_aeo_scan by noting that AEO data is intentionally omitted.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (for SEO audit) and when not to (for AI-visibility, directing to jackpotkeywords_aeo_scan). Also mentions cost ($0.50), latency, and automatic refund on failure, providing clear decision-making context.

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