get_query_stats

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the return type and a possible exception, but it omits prerequisites, authentication needs, rate limits, pagination, sorting, or what 'top' means. This is minimal behavioral disclosure for an unannotated tool.

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 short and cleanly structured with Summary, Args, Returns, and Raises sections. The first sentence and Returns line repeat 'top queries' slightly, but there is no wasted content.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description provides enough to attempt a call, including return type and error behavior. However, it lacks context for selecting this tool among similar query-statistics siblings and omits prerequisites such as site verification or data availability.

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 description says 'site_url: The URL of the site', which essentially restates the schema title 'Site Url' and the parameter name. It adds no format, example, constraints, or clarification beyond what the schema already communicates, and schema description coverage is 0%, so the description should compensate more.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Get detailed traffic statistics for top queries.' This is specific enough to communicate the core operation, but it does not distinguish this tool from very similar siblings like get_query_traffic_stats, get_query_page_stats, or get_rank_and_traffic_stats.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool instead of the many similar query-statistics siblings. Terms like 'top queries' are not defined, and there are no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative tool references.

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