keyword_search

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

Without annotations, the description covers cost, credit consumption logic, keyword input options, search engine choices, and language parameter reference. It lacks details on pagination or rate limits but provides essential behavioral context.

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 concise and well-structured: summary, cost, recommendation, then parameter list. Every sentence adds value, front-loaded with main purpose.

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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks details on return format, error handling, or limits on keyword count. Still covers critical input aspects.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description explains each parameter meaningfully: language with examples, mutual exclusivity of keyword/keywords, and search engine defaults. Adds value beyond 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 finds backlink opportunities from keywords via SERP analysis. It uses specific verbs and resources, and hints at being the best entry point, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like ai_search or competitor_analysis.

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 credit cost and consumption condition, and recommends it as the best entry point. However, it does not specify when not to use it or contrast with alternative tools among siblings.

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