List Properties

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

Annotations already mark this as a read-only, non-destructive operation. The description adds useful behavioral context by clarifying that the listing is scoped to the authenticated account and that the response includes property type and permission level, which is not available from annotations or the empty schema.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The main action and scope are front-loaded, and the added sentence about output fields earns its place by describing what the agent will receive.

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, read-only listing tool, the description is sufficient: it names the resource, the scope, and the output contents. There is no output schema, so mentioning property type and permission level helps the agent understand the response shape.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description gives no parameter details, but none are needed for a zero-parameter tool, and schema coverage is trivially complete.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('Google Search Console properties'), and a clear scope ('accessible to the authenticated account'). It also states what the result contains (property type and permission level), making it easy to distinguish from sibling tools like list_sitemaps.

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 intended use is clear: call this when you need to see all properties the authenticated account can access. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but no sibling tool is a direct alternative for this listing operation, so the lack of exclusions is acceptable.

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