indexing_publish

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 mentions only the notification action and does not describe the effect of URL_DELETED notifications, idempotency, rate limits, authentication requirements, or any side effects. The claim of 'new or updated' also conflicts with the schema's inclusion of URL_DELETED.

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 concise sentence with no filler. The core action and target appear immediately, making it easy to scan and parse.

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 two-parameter notification tool, the description is minimally viable but incomplete. It does not explain the URL_DELETED option, what the tool returns after a successful notification, or any constraints on usage. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, this missing context matters more than it would otherwise.

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 the schema already documents both parameters. The description adds no extra parameter semantics and is actually misleading: it describes only 'new or updated' URLs while the type parameter also accepts URL_DELETED. This creates confusion rather than adding value 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 states a specific action and target: 'Notifies Google about a new or updated URL for indexing.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like indexing_batch_publish and indexing_get_status by indicating a single publication action. However, it omits the URL_DELETED notification type that is present in the enum, so it under-describes the full scope of the tool.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus indexing_batch_publish or indexing_get_status. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer selection criteria from the tool name and sibling list.

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