get_site_details

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world behavior. The description adds useful content detail about permission and verification/ownership information plus the environment-variable default, but does not mention permission requirements, rate limits, or other behavioral constraints.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by focused parameter guidance. There is no filler, and the Args section is short and directly useful.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description gives enough to call it correctly, including the default and expected identifier format. The main remaining gap is explicit routing guidance among related property tools.

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 0%, so the description carries the full burden for site_url. It compensates well by explaining the exact property format, giving examples for URL-prefix and domain properties, pointing to list_properties as the source, and documenting the GSC_SITE_URL default.

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 states a clear verb/resource intent: retrieving permission level and verification/ownership details for one property. It is specific enough to distinguish it from broader summary or analytics tools, though it does not explicitly contrast with siblings like get_site_summary or get_capabilities.

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?

Usage is implied by the purpose, and the description helpfully says the site_url should come from list_properties. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over get_site_summary, get_capabilities, or other property-related siblings.

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