gmb_performance_locations_searchkeywords_impressions_mo_4ba8b09f

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds context that results are aggregated monthly, but does not describe pagination behavior, response format details, or any potential edge cases. This is acceptable but not exceptional.

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 concise and front-loaded with the endpoint and a clear statement of purpose. The example request is useful but slightly verbose. All sentences contribute value with no fluff.

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 complexity (13 params) and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and provides an illustrative example. It explains what is returned (keywords with monthly impressions). Missing details like pagination or response structure are partially covered by schema and annotations, making it fairly complete.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond the example request for monthlyRange, which is already covered by the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate per guidelines.

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 returns search keywords used to find a business in search or maps, aggregated monthly. The verb 'Returns' and specific resource ('searchkeywords/impressions/monthly') make it distinct from siblings like getdailymetricstimeseries and fetchmultidailymetricstimeseries.

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?

It provides clear context by describing the monthly aggregation and giving an example request. It implies when to use it (search keyword impressions) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. However, the naming and description are sufficient to infer appropriate usage.

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