list_sites

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It mentions 'accessible by the authenticated user', implying authentication needs, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like rate limits, pagination, or data freshness. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but 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?

A single sentence that is highly efficient and front-loaded. Every word contributes value without redundancy.

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 parameterless tool with an output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value (list of properties) and the context (accessible by user). It is complete given the tool's low complexity and the presence of sibling 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?

There are no parameters, and the input schema is empty. The description adds meaning by clarifying that the list is limited to properties accessible by the authenticated user, which goes beyond the schema. Baseline 4 for zero parameters.

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 verb 'List' and the resource 'Search Console properties', with the scope 'accessible by the authenticated user'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools which focus on specific metrics or inspections.

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?

While the description implies use when needing a list of accessible properties, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_site_summary or query_performance. The existence of sibling tools provides context, but the description lacks guidance.

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