Lists the Google Search Console properties your credentials can access, including each property’s permission level, so you can choose the right site before pulling performance data.
List the Search Console properties these credentials can read, with permission level.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden; 'List' implies a non-destructive read but that is never asserted outright. It does add useful context by disclosing that a permission level is returned per property, which is behavior beyond the (empty) schema. Pagination, ordering, and whether inaccessible properties are omitted are not covered.
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?
A single sentence with no waste, front-loading the action and resource before the scope and return detail. Nothing could be cut without losing information.
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 trivial zero-argument list tool with no output schema, the description covers what the tool returns (properties plus permission level) and the credential-based scoping. It falls just short on response shape details like ordering or paging, which matter if the account has many properties.
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?
Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate — baseline 4 applies. The empty schema is consistent with the described behavior of listing everything the credentials can see.
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?
Specific verb and resource ('List the Search Console properties') with an explicit scope qualifier ('these credentials can read') and an indication of what comes back ('with permission level'). It doesn't name or distinguish itself from the sibling search_analytics, but the two differ obviously enough (enumerate properties vs. query analytics).
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 phrase 'these credentials can read' implies a discovery use case — figure out which properties are accessible before calling search_analytics — but the description never states when to use it, when not to, or that search_analytics should be called afterwards. Usage is inferable rather than guided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.