page_queries

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

The description lacks explicit disclosure of behavioral traits such as being read-only or any side effects. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden but does not state that the operation is non-destructive. It could be improved by clarifying that no data is modified.

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, focused sentence that delivers the core purpose first and then provides supporting details. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 and lack of output schema, the description covers the return data (clicks, CTR, position) and ordering (by impressions). However, it does not specify that results are sorted descending or if there are any limits. Most context is provided for this type of search analytics tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds output field details (clicks, CTR, position) but does not add new information about the parameters beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specifies the resource 'GSC queries driving traffic to a specific page'. It lists the output fields (clicks, CTR, position) and mentions sorting by impressions. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like detect_cannibalization and rank_changes, which have different focuses.

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?

Usage is implied for analyzing queries for a specific page, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusion conditions or when-not-to scenarios are provided.

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