list_propertiesList all Google Search Console properties available to your account, including each property's permission level, to verify access and roles.
List all GSC properties the authenticated user has access to, with permission levels.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the authentication scope and that permission levels are returned, and 'List' implies a read-only operation. It does not mention potential pagination, rate limits, or inclusion criteria for properties, but for a zero-parameter list tool this is acceptable though not thorough.
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 entire description is a single focused sentence with no filler. The action, scope, and distinguishing output feature are all front-loaded.
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 zero-parameter listing tool, the description covers the essential context: scope, authentication, and permission levels. An output schema exists to document the return structure, so the description doesn't need to explain the response shape. It could have added a hint that this tool is useful as a discovery step before property-specific tools.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed since the input schema is empty and schema coverage is 100%.
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 action ('List all GSC properties') and a clear scope ('the authenticated user has access to'), and adds the distinct output feature 'with permission levels.' This clearly distinguishes it from the many property-specific sibling tools like get_site_details or delete_site.
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 when to use the tool: to enumerate accessible GSC properties before operating on a specific one. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling to choose instead, so the usage context is implied rather than stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.