google-search-console-mcp

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

While annotations declare read-only/idempotent properties, the description adds valuable behavioral context about the grouping logic (grouped by account) when multiple accounts exist. It also confirms the external scope (Google Search Console), aligning with the openWorldHint annotation without contradiction.

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 consists of two efficient sentences with zero waste. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose, while the second provides essential conditional behavior regarding account handling. Every word earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity (single optional parameter, read-only operation) and strong annotations, the description is appropriately complete. It explains what is returned (sites grouped by account) despite the absence of an output schema, though it could briefly mention the return format structure.

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 coverage, the input schema fully documents the account parameter's purpose and optional nature. The description reinforces this behavior but does not add significant semantic meaning—such as example account aliases or validation rules—beyond what the schema already provides.

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 specific action ('List') and resource ('sites') with context ('Google Search Console'). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'list_accounts' (which lists accounts) and 'list_sitemaps' (which lists sitemaps) by specifying it returns sites the user has access to.

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 guidance on parameter behavior, explaining exactly what happens when the account parameter is omitted in multi-account scenarios ('shows all accounts' sites grouped by account'). However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus 'list_accounts' first, or how it relates to site-specific tools like 'inspect_url'.

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