Keyword Overview (single database)

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses little beyond content. It does not state whether calls consume Semrush API units (relevant given the semrush_api_units_balance sibling), whether authentication is required, latency, or error behavior for invalid database codes.

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 with no filler; the scope qualifier and included data types come early. It is efficient, though arguably too terse to be maximally useful.

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, no annotations, and only two parameters, the description partially fills the gap by naming included data (trends, SERP features). However, it omits the routing decision against the sibling keyword_overview and any cost/limit context, leaving the definition adequate but not 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 50%: the 'database' parameter is documented with example codes and a default, but 'phrase' has no description. The description adds only a mild reinforcement of the regional-database concept, not new syntax or format meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate given partial schema 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?

States a specific resource (keyword metrics) with a clear scope qualifier ('one regional database') and lists included outputs (trend data, SERP features). The 'single database' framing implicitly distinguishes it from the sibling semrush_keyword_overview, but the description never names that alternative, so the contrast must be inferred from the tool name.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The phrase 'one regional database' hints at the selection condition versus a multi-database variant, but the sibling semrush_keyword_overview is never mentioned, leaving the agent to guess which tool to call.

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