list_properties

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It makes clear this is a read/list operation scoped to the service account and that output includes permission levels, implying no side effects. It does not detail edge cases like empty results, but for a simple listing tool this is adequate.

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, front-loaded sentence conveys the resource, scope, and output contents without any filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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 zero-parameter listing tool with an output schema, this description is complete. The agent knows exactly what the tool returns and under whose access context, so no additional information is needed to invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to explain about inputs. The mention of permission levels adds useful context about the return data, and the baseline for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate.

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 action (list), the resource (Google Search Console properties), the scope (accessible to the service account), and the included detail (permission levels). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sitemaps without needing to inspect schemas.

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: this is the tool for discovering which GSC properties the service account can access and their permission levels. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but among the siblings it is the only property-listing tool, so usage is unambiguous.

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