bing_page_query_matrix

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, any side effects, rate limits, or data freshness constraints. For a query tool, this is a significant gap in transparency.

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 extremely concise with two sentences and a bulleted parameter list. Every element serves a purpose, with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and efficiently details parameters.

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 the tool has an output schema, the description does not need to explain return values. It adequately covers purpose and parameters, but could be more complete by mentioning the typical output structure (matrix of queries and metrics), which is already covered by the output schema.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clearly explains each parameter: page_url is required, start_date defaults to 28 days ago, end_date defaults to today, row_limit defaults to 100. It also specifies date format YYYY-MM-DD, adding value beyond the schema.

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 tool's function: 'Find which Bing queries drive a specific page.' It uses a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes itself from siblings like 'bing_query_to_pages' (reverse mapping) and 'gsc_page_query_matrix' (Google version).

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 such as 'bing_query_to_pages' or 'gsc_page_query_matrix'. It does not specify when not to use it or any prerequisites, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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