gsc_search_analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, but it says nothing about return format, pagination, rate limits, authentication, or the meaning of 'raw'. The agent has no idea what to expect from the call, making this a severe transparency gap.

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 sentence, which is concise, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. There is no front-loading of critical details, and the sentence lacks the substance needed for an agent to act correctly.

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 tool with 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is completely inadequate. It doesn't explain the response structure, the meaning of 'raw', or any constraints, leaving the agent unable to understand the tool's full behavior or results.

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?

The schema description coverage is only 43%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters like 'type', 'rowLimit', and 'startRow'. It adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, failing to clarify the purpose or format of these fields.

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 verb ('Run') and resource ('Search Console Search Analytics query'), but the word 'raw' is vague and doesn't distinguish this tool from siblings like gsc_top_queries or gsc_top_pages, which also run GSC queries. The agent cannot tell what makes this 'raw' or how it differs from the pre-built 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description gives no context about scenarios where a raw query is appropriate, nor does it mention any exclusions or sibling comparisons, leaving the agent without direction.

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