Domain Paid Keywords

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the returned fields (ad position, volume, CPC, landing page URL), which is useful, but says nothing about permissions, rate limits, or API-unit cost beyond what the limit param already states.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence listing the resource and its key output fields, with zero filler. Appropriately sized.

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 usefully enumerates the return fields, covering the return-value gap. But usage context and sibling differentiation are absent, leaving the definition only minimally 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 coverage is 67%: limit and database are documented in the schema (including the API-unit cost hint), while domain is self-evident. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the schema does the work — baseline 3.

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?

States a specific resource and scope: 'Keywords a domain is bidding on in Google Ads', which distinguishes it implicitly from the organic-keyword sibling. However, it never names semrush_domain_organic_keywords to make the paid-vs-organic split explicit.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not, or alternative guidance is given. An agent must infer that this is the paid-side counterpart to semrush_domain_organic_keywords; nothing in the description routes it there.

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