Add a property to Search Console

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation and is not idempotent. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond that: ownership verification is not handled by the API and must be completed in the Search Console UI before data appears. This prevents the agent from assuming immediate data availability after calling the 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?

The description is compact and front-loaded, stating the core action in the first sentence. The additional sentences each add necessary constraints or expectations without any 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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the input format, the API limitation, and the required post-call verification step. It does not describe potential errors or idempotency behavior, but those are partly covered by annotations and are less critical given the small surface area.

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 100% and the single siteUrl parameter is already described with its URI format. The description adds value by reinforcing the required trailing slash, providing a concrete example, and specifying that only URL-prefix properties are accepted, which directly informs how to construct the parameter value.

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 names a precise verb and resource: adding a URL-prefix property to the authorized account's Search Console. It also clarifies the exact property type and distinguishes itself from domain properties and from sibling tools like gsc_list_sites and gsc_delete_site.

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 clearly conveys when this tool is appropriate: adding URL-prefix properties. It also gives an explicit exclusion ('Domain properties cannot be added through the API') and explains that verification must happen in the UI, which sets expectations for follow-up steps. It does not name alternative tools directly, but the usage context is otherwise clear.

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