gsc_search_analytics

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'queries' but doesn't disclose behavioral traits like rate limits, authentication, data freshness, or consequences of invalid parameters. The mutation/read nature is implied but not explicit.

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?

One sentence, no fluff, front-loaded with the main action. It is concise but could be extended with minimal extra context without harming brevity.

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 10 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description omits essential context for effective use. Complex parameters like dimension_filter_groups and pagination (start_row) are unexplained, leaving the agent to rely solely on schema descriptions.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema; it lists metrics and dimensions generally but doesn't explain complex parameters like dimension_filter_groups or aggregation_type.

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 it queries Google Search Console analytics data for impressions, clicks, CTR, and position, specifying dimensions like queries, pages, countries, devices. It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes well from sibling tools like gsc_add_site or gsc_inspect_url.

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 on when to use this tool over siblings, e.g., for aggregated performance data vs. individual URL inspection. No context about prerequisites or typical scenarios.

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