Динамика запросов Wordstat

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the output essence and gives no details about date-range handling, default period, required permissions, pagination, or return shape. This is thin for an unannotated tool.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the key value proposition and the main aggregation options. Every word earns its place; no filler or 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?

With 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, a one-line description leaves an agent without guidance on device/region filtering, date ranges, defaults, or expected results. It is barely adequate for correct invocation beyond the required phrase parameter.

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 only 33% (toDate/fromDate have descriptions). The phrase 'по дням, неделям или месяцам' maps to the period parameter but adds nothing about phrase, devices, regions, or date semantics, so it 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 conveys 'frequency dynamics of a phrase aggregated by day/week/month', which clearly differentiates it from sibling tools about user info, regions, and top requests. It lacks an explicit verb but the noun phrase is unambiguous enough for an agent to know what resource and operation are involved.

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?

Usage is implied: this tool is for tracking temporal frequency trends of a phrase. However, there is no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives, no exclusions, and differentiation from siblings relies on their titles rather than stated criteria.

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