Google Search Console MCP

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and successfully discloses destructive behavior ('Deletes the current OAuth token file') and interactive side effects ('triggers the browser authentication flow'). It clarifies this is not just a silent state refresh but involves file deletion and browser interaction. Could mention blocking behavior or timeout handling.

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 well-structured sentences with zero waste: action statement, behavioral mechanism, and usage context. Front-loaded with the core verb phrase and appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 zero parameters, no output schema, and simple destructive utility nature, the description is complete. It adequately covers the operation's scope, side effects, and usage scenario without needing return value documentation or complex parameter explanation.

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 input schema has zero parameters, establishing a baseline score of 4 per the evaluation rules. No parameter semantics are required or provided.

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 specific action ('Perform a logout and new login sequence') and mechanism ('Deletes the current OAuth token file and triggers the browser authentication flow'). It strongly distinguishes itself from data-oriented siblings like get_site_details or submit_sitemap by focusing entirely on authentication management.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use ('Useful when you need to switch to a different Google account'), which is highly relevant given this is the only auth-related tool among data-centric siblings. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative references, but the context makes misuse unlikely.

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