site_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool returns only the listed metrics and comparison data, and explicitly warns against speculation, implying the tool does not provide causal analysis. It also mandates a visualization format, adding context beyond a simple read operation.

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 verbose, containing separate IMPORTANT and PRESENTATION sections with detailed agent instructions about analysis and visualization. While the first sentence is concise and informative, the additional directives are more about agent behavior than tool functionality, making it over-specified and not appropriately sized.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the key return metrics and the prior-period comparison. It provides enough information for an agent to understand what the tool does and what to expect, though it lacks explicit edge-case or error-behavior details.

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 already documents the 'days' parameter with 100% description coverage. The tool description adds little direct parameter detail, but the mention of 'comparison to the prior period' indirectly clarifies the period semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'quick overview of how the site is performing', followed by the specific metrics returned (clicks, impressions, CTR, position) and the comparison to the prior period. This distinguishes it from sibling analytics tools that focus on deeper or more granular analysis.

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 implies usage by indicating this is for a 'quick overview' but does not explicitly mention alternatives or provide exclusions. The IMPORTANT and PRESENTATION sections give guidance on interpreting and presenting results, but not on when to choose this tool over siblings.

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