gsc_portfolio_summary

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

Annotations indicate it's read-only and idempotent. The description adds value by detailing the output fields and mentioning the data state and alias convention, going beyond annotation hints.

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?

Three sentences, each purposeful. The first front-loads the core purpose, the second specifies output and use case, the third adds technical details. 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and rich annotations, the description fully covers purpose, return format, filtering options, and behavioral details. No gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds the alias convention for the 'days' parameter, providing extra context beyond the schema.

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 property and returns a one-row summary per property with specific metrics. It distinguishes itself from siblings like gsc_list_properties and gsc_search_analytics by positioning as a portfolio-level view.

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?

Explicitly states it's the fastest answer for portfolio performance across multi-property setups, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or list alternative tools for deeper analysis.

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