query_search_analytics_tool

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return metrics and grouping behavior, which implies a read-only operation. However, it does not mention potential limitations, rate limits, data freshness, or side effects, which would be valuable for full transparency.

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 primary purpose, then return value, then suggested use cases. Every sentence adds value with no fluff.

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 complexity (10 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers the essential purpose, output metrics, and use cases. It does not need to explain return values because an output schema is present. Missing details like pagination and data state are handled by the schema, so the description is sufficiently 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds narrative about dimensions (pages, queries, countries, devices, date ranges) and filters, but these are already covered in the schema parameters. It does not introduce additional meaning 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 queries search traffic data, names the returned metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, average position), and distinguishes it from sibling site management tools. The verb 'Query' and resource 'search traffic data' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly states when to use the tool: 'Use this to analyze search performance for specific pages, queries, countries, devices, or date ranges.' This provides clear context, though it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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