gsc_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It implies a read-only operation via 'Get' but does not add behavioral context such as data freshness, caching, or precondition requirements. This is adequate for a simple retrieval tool but lacks depth.

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 includes essential specifics (28-day, metrics). It is concise and contains no extraneous information.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description lists the metrics returned (clicks, impressions, CTR, position), effectively conveying the response content. It could be more comprehensive by noting data computation or freshness, but is largely complete for its simplicity.

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 single parameter site_id is fully described in the schema ('Site ID'), so the description adds no additional meaning. Per guidelines, the baseline is 3 when schema coverage is high, and no extra value is provided.

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 a specific verb ('Get'), resource ('GSC performance summary'), and scope ('28-day clicks, impressions, CTR, position'). This distinguishes it from related tools like gsc_queries and gsc_daily_summary by focusing on aggregate summary metrics.

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 such as gsc_queries, gsc_daily_summary, or gsc_opportunities. The description only states what it does, without any context for selection or exclusions.

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