bing_top_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and largely fails to. It does disclose one useful trait — the data refreshes weekly — but says nothing about read-only nature, permissions/auth requirements, or result scope for what is clearly a data-retrieval call.

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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than deliberate trimming.

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 retrieval tool with a required siteUrl, an undocumented limit, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too sparse. An agent still cannot tell what a returned 'top query' contains or how limit affects results.

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 coverage is only 50%: siteUrl is documented ('URL exacta de la propiedad verificada') while limit is entirely undocumented in both schema and description. The description adds nothing about parameter meaning or format, so it does not compensate for the 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?

The description identifies the resource (top queries) and the source (Bing), which tells an agent broadly what it retrieves. However, it is a bare noun phrase with no verb and no differentiation from close siblings like bing_top_pages, bing_page_queries, or bing_query_pages, so what exactly a 'top query' is (search terms for the property?) is left implicit.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this tool versus the many Bing siblings, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent is given no routing guidance at all.

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