remove_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It discloses irreversibility, which is critical, but it does not mention side effects, confirmation steps, or what happens to associated data. The term 'draft' further obscures behavior, making the disclosure insufficient.

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 information is compact and front-loaded: the core purpose and irreversibility are in the first sentence, and the alternative is clearly noted. The 'Live-verified 2026-07-28' line is extra but not distracting, so the structure is efficient.

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 the simplicity (2 simple params, no output schema) and the lack of annotations, the description is still inadequate. It does not mention prerequisites, effects on related entities, or how this differs from other deletion tools beyond pause_entity. An agent cannot fully gauge the tool's impact from the description alone.

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 0%, and the description does not explain any parameters. ad_group_id and keyword_ids are only given by name and type in the schema, with no added meaning about their purpose or constraints. The description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 states 'keyword deletion' and 'irreversible', which clearly identifies the core action and distinguishes it from pause_entity. However, the word 'draft' introduces ambiguity—whether this is a pending operation or an immediate deletion—so it is not fully 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?

The description mentions 'pause_entity is the reversible lever', implying a usage condition (permanent vs reversible). However, it does not differentiate from other sibling removal tools like remove_entity, remove_negative_keywords, or remove_extension, so guidance is partial.

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