google-search-console-mcp

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

While annotations comprehensively cover safety (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), the description adds no behavioral context beyond this. It fails to clarify whether the export returns raw data, a download URL, or a file ID, and omits details about pagination limits, async processing, or data retention.

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 single-sentence description is efficiently structured with the verb front-loaded. The trailing phrase 'for external analysis or reporting' provides modest value, suggesting the description could be tighter, but there is no significant waste or redundancy.

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 rich annotations and complete input schema, the description adequately covers the basics. However, the absence of an output schema creates a gap that the description fails to fill—it does not explain what the export returns (file content, URL, or reference), which is critical for an export operation.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the structured documentation carries the semantic load. The description mentions 'CSV or JSON format' which aligns with the format parameter, but does not add clarifying details about dimension combinations, date range constraints, or account alias resolution logic beyond what the schema already states.

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 ('Export'), resource ('search analytics data'), and supported formats ('CSV or JSON'). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'query_search_analytics' tool, which likely retrieves the same data but in a different manner.

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 phrase 'for external analysis or reporting' provides implied usage context, suggesting when to choose file export formats. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'query_search_analytics' or other data retrieval siblings, and does not mention prerequisites like account configuration.

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