bing_search_queries

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It names the core metrics returned and scopes the data to 'your site,' but it does not mention time range, aggregation, ordering, pagination, or any access requirements beyond what the schema already states.

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, front-loaded sentence that states the action, the platform, and the key data fields with no filler. Every word is informative and the structure is immediately scannable by an agent.

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?

The tool is relatively simple, has an output schema, and all parameters are documented, so the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks any usage context or behavioral caveats, leaving the agent to infer when and how to invoke it beyond the basic purpose.

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 does not add parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema; it only summarizes the tool's output. It comports with the schema but adds no extra semantic value for site_url, limit, or format.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('Bing search query data'), and lists the returned metrics (impressions, clicks, CTR, position). It also inherently distinguishes itself from the sibling 'gsc_search_queries' tool by specifying Bing as the data source.

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 like gsc_search_queries or gads_keyword_ideas. The description implies it is for Bing query data, but it does not state scenarios, exclusions, or why an agent should choose it over siblings.

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