List Search Console properties

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true. The description adds meaningful context by stating the exact output format and clarifying that it only lists properties the connected account can access, without contradicting the annotations.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states what the tool does and returns, the second gives natural-language triggers, and the third explains the discovery role. No fluff or repetition.

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?

For a zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema and clear annotations, this description is complete. It covers purpose, output structure, triggering user intents, and integration with other tools.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so the baseline is 4. No parameter explanations are needed, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior and usage rather than inputs.

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 a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Google Search Console properties'), and scopes it to the connected account's accessible sites. It also specifies the return shape ({ siteUrl, permissionLevel }), making it clearly distinct from sibling tools like sites.add and sites.delete.

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 gives explicit trigger phrases ('what sites do I have?', 'what properties are connected?') and an explicit discovery-use case before tools requiring site_url. It lacks an explicit 'do not use when...' clause, so it's strong but not a perfect 5.

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