Search Console: query a distanza di tiro

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds one behavioral trait not present in structured fields: results are sorted by impressions. It does not disclose return shape, pagination, or whether the position band is inclusive, so it adds moderate rather than rich context.

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?

A single compact sentence with the defining position band and sort order front-loaded before the use-case clause. No filler, though the informational payload is thin for a nine-parameter tool.

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 nine-parameter tool with no output schema, the description conveys the core selection logic but leaves date-window behavior, result size, and return fields to inference. Adequate minimum, but not complete for the tool's complexity.

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 56%, so several of the nine parameters (limit, and undescriptioned numeric bounds) are undocumented. The description does clarify the minPosition/maxPosition defaults (4-20), which is the tool's defining filter, but it says nothing about days, startDate/endDate interaction, siteUrl fallback, or pageContains/minImpressions.

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 analytical concept: queries where the page is already visible but not at the top, with a default position band of 4-20, sorted by impressions. That is concrete enough to distinguish it from siblings like gsc_performance, though the verb 'Query' is generic and it does not name the competing tools.

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 intent is implied by 'le opportunità più rapide da ottimizzare', which tells the agent this is for finding quick-win optimization targets. However, there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives such as gsc_performance or gsc_compare_periods.

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