get_top_queries

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 indicates a read-only 'Get' action and a site/lookback scope, but it does not explain sorting logic, default behavior for missing parameters, what 'top' means, or any caveats about data freshness or permissions.

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 sentence with no wasted words and front-loads the action and object. It is concise and readable, but the brevity sacrifices useful sibling differentiation and usage context, so it is efficient rather than fully informative.

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 tool has no annotations, no output schema, only optional parameters, and close siblings. The description does not specify return shape, how defaults like days and limit behave, what 'top' means, or when to prefer search_analytics or get_top_pages. This is a thin description for a tool that needs more contextual grounding.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description only loosely echoes the 'lookback window' concept and adds no meaning beyond the schema for days, limit, or site_url. It does not clarify what metric determines 'top' or how site_url is used.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('top search queries') with a clear scoping clause ('for a site over a lookback window'). It is not a tautology, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from the closely related sibling tools get_top_pages and search_analytics.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools search_analytics and get_top_pages overlap conceptually with 'top queries', but the description never mentions them, nor does it state any preconditions or exclusion criteria.

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