Get HitKeep Search Console

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

The description aligns with the readOnlyHint and idempotentHint annotations ('Read' indicates no side effects). Since annotations already declare safety, the description does not need extra detail. It adds context about the type of data but doesn't contradict annotations. Adequate 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 a single, clear sentence with no redundant words. It follows a logical structure: action, resource, optional modifications, and scope. Highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The description covers the essential context: what data is read, the optional sections, and that it's per site. Given the rich schema and annotations, it is complete enough. It does not mention return format, but no output schema is provided, so this is acceptable.

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 schema provides detailed descriptions for all 9 parameters, including defaults, allowed values, and formats (e.g., 'RFC3339 end timestamp', 'alpha-2 or alpha-3 country code'). The tool description doesn't need to add more because the schema fully explains each parameter's meaning.

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 action ('Read'), the resource ('imported Google Search Console'), and the scope ('overview, series, and optional dimension reports for one site'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'hitkeep_get_ai_visibility' by specifying the Search Console data source.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives. It implies usage for Search Console data but lacks direct comparison or conditions such as 'Use this when you need Search Console performance metrics.' No when-not or alternative guidance is provided.

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