gsc_top_queries

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses the output fields and sorting order (by clicks), which is helpful. However, it omits details about the default limit (e.g., 25), pagination behavior, or data freshness. These are gaps that could affect user expectations.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, and the second sentence adds output details. There is no redundant or fluff content, making it appropriately concise.

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 list tool, the description covers the core purpose, output fields, and sorting. It does not explicitly mention default limit behavior or the role of the optional siteUrl parameter, but these are partially available in the schema. The absence of an output schema makes the field list important, which is provided. Overall, it is nearly complete.

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 every parameter already has a description. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level context, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage. Baseline of 3 applies.

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 action ('Get the top search queries'), the resource (search queries driving traffic to your site), and the sorting criteria (by clicks). It also lists the returned fields, making the tool's purpose unmistakable and distinct from siblings like gsc_top_pages or gsc_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?

The description implies the use case—when you need top queries—but does not explicitly mention when to use it instead of alternatives like gsc_search_analytics or gsc_top_pages. There are no exclusions or alternative references, so the guidance is only implicit.

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