get_search_analytics_snapshot

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, and the description adds substantial operational context beyond them: the 100k-row / 10-page / 180-second bounds, Google's omission of anonymized long-tail rows, partial-result survival on provider errors, and freshness metadata. This is exactly the kind of behavior an agent cannot learn from structured fields.

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?

Four dense sentences with no filler, and the core capability plus limits are front-loaded. Slightly terse and fragmentary ('Partial results survive provider errors.') but every sentence carries 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the description covers the important operational caveats (bounds, partial results, freshness metadata). The notable gap is parameter meaning, which is left entirely undocumented.

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 description coverage is 0% across 6 parameters, so the schema itself explains nothing. The description only loosely touches max_rows (via 'at most 100,000 rows / 10 API pages') and says nothing about days, max_requests, dimensions, search_type, or site_url semantics. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Fetch a ... Search Console snapshot') with scope qualifiers (bounded, paginated, explicit coverage). However, it never distinguishes itself from close siblings like get_search_analytics, get_advanced_search_analytics, or get_performance_overview, so an agent cannot tell from the text alone which one to pick.

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 explains the tool's limits but gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing against the numerous sibling analytics tools. An agent must infer the selection criteria from the name alone.

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