List sites

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that the tool lists permissions, aliases, and active status. It does not mention any side effects, rate limits, or authorization details beyond 'signed-in user', but for a non-destructive read operation this is adequate.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and output details. Every phrase earns its place with no wasted words.

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 no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what information each property entry includes, which is sufficient for an agent to understand the return values without an explicit output schema.

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 tool has no parameters, so schema coverage is 100% by default. The description adds value by explaining what each element in the output includes (permission level, alias, active/default), which is beneficial despite no parameters needing explanation.

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 lists every accessible Search Console property, including permission level, alias, and default status. It uses specific verb+resource ('List every Search Console property') and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like 'get_active_site' which returns only the active site.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool (when needing a complete list of accessible properties and their details). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools, though siblings like 'get_active_site' and 'account_overview' exist.

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