gsc get data freshness

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds modest behavioral context by saying the tool scans recent daily rows, but it does not disclose edge-case behavior like what happens when no data exists in the lookback window. The output schema lowers the burden of explaining return values.

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 with no filler. It states the core function first and the mechanism second, making it immediately scannable for 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?

This is a simple, low-risk read-only tool with zero required parameters, fully documented schema, rich annotations, and an output schema. The one-sentence description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly; nothing essential is missing.

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 schema already documents all three parameters. The description's 'recent daily rows' loosely maps to lookbackDays but adds no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb ('Detect') and a concrete resource ('most recent date with Search Analytics data'), which clearly differentiates it from general query tools like gsc_query_search_analytics. It also conveys the method ('querying recent daily rows') without ambiguity.

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 use case is implied by the description: the tool tells you how fresh Search Analytics data is. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over siblings such as gsc_monitor_indexation_freshness or gsc_query_search_analytics, leaving the routing decision to inference.

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