trend_gsc

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions aggregation by captured_at, filtering, chronological ordering, and limit. However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, data freshness, or that it queries stored snapshots (though that's implied). Additional behavioral context like safety or rate limits would be beneficial.

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 sentences, each serving a purpose: first defines the tool's output, second explains aggregation and filtering. No redundant wording. Optimal length for the information provided.

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 core functionality: time-series from stored GSC snapshots, filtering, and ordering. With an existing output schema, it is reasonably complete. However, missing details like data source freshness or parameter format slightly reduce completeness.

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%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning to site_url (required), query and page (optional filters), and limit (default 50). However, it lacks details on valid formats or constraints for parameters, especially query and page. The description provides minimal extra value beyond the schema structure.

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 returns time-series data (clicks/impressions/position) from stored GSC snapshots, aggregated by captured_at. It distinguishes itself from siblings like gsc_performance and snapshot_gsc by specifying the source and aggregation.

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 filtering by query and page for drill-down, and the limit parameter. It implies usage for trend analysis but doesn't explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. Sibling context provides additional guidance.

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