Google Search Console MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Remove' implies a destructive operation, the description fails to clarify whether this is permanent data deletion versus simply removing the property from the console view, or whether the action is reversible. No error handling behavior is described.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter details. Despite the length of the Args section, the examples are necessary given the lack of schema documentation. No extraneous information is included.

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 destructive tool without output schema, the description adequately documents the input parameter. However, it lacks important context for a deletion operation—specifically whether the removal is permanent, if associated data is deleted, and what confirmation or error responses to expect.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description excellently compensates by providing detailed parameter semantics in the Args section. It specifies the exact match requirement and provides concrete examples for different URL formats (www, subdomain, path) and the domain property syntax (sc-domain:example.com), which is critical for correct invocation.

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 action ('Remove') and resource ('site from your Search Console properties'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'delete_sitemap', which could cause confusion given the similar naming.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_sitemap' or 'add_site', nor does it mention prerequisites such as the site needing to exist in the user's properties. No 'when-not-to-use' exclusions are present.

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