All Properties Overview

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It describes the output format ('interactive grid') and includes a prerequisite action ('run setup first'), which adds useful context. However, it doesn't cover other behavioral aspects like whether this is a read-only operation, performance characteristics, or error handling.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by additional details in a logical flow. Every sentence earns its place by explaining features, interaction, and prerequisites without redundancy. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

Given the tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly complete. It explains what the tool does, the output format, and a prerequisite. However, it could improve by mentioning the tool's read-only nature or linking to sibling tools for related actions, which would enhance completeness.

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 thoroughly. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, such as explaining how 'search' interacts with the grid or default behaviors. This meets the baseline of 3 when schema coverage is high.

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 tool's purpose with specific verbs ('see', 'shows') and resources ('all your sites', 'every synced GSC property'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'list_properties' by specifying it shows an interactive grid with detailed metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, etc.) and trends, rather than just listing properties.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('see all your sites at a glance') and includes a prerequisite ('If no data appears, run setup first to sync your properties'). However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives among siblings, such as 'get_dashboard' for individual property details.

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