Account overview (all sites)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the data returned (clicks, impressions, ranking) and notes that SEO/coverage scores are added later, which is helpful. However, it does not mention auth requirements, rate limits, or whether the operation is read-only, which are gaps.

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 two sentences, front-loading the core purpose in the first sentence and adding a future note in parentheses. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or waste.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one optional parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description provides adequate context about what the tool returns. It lacks details on output format or pagination, but for a ranked overview tool, this is sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage for the single parameter 'days', including a description. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it provides a portfolio view across all accessible properties, showing clicks and impressions per site ranked for the last 28 days. While it identifies the resource and action, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like list_sites or top_pages, which also provide site-level data.

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 use for a high-level overview but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No conditions, exclusions, or when-not-to-use are mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage context.

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