compare_search_periods

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It implies a read operation ('Compare search analytics data') and provides useful context about property URL formats, but it does not explicitly state side effects, permissions, rate limits, or output behavior. The absence of risk-related details is acceptable for a read-only tool, but more transparency would be better.

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 starts with a clear one-line summary followed by a well-organized Args block. Every line provides necessary information, though the Args block is somewhat lengthy. It is appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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 complexity (7 parameters, two-period comparison) and the existence of an output schema, the description is sufficient. It provides all parameter semantics and enough context for correct invocation. It does not explain the comparison methodology, but that is likely covered by the output schema.

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%, but the Args section fully explains every parameter: site_url format, date formats, dimensions, and limit defaults. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare property names and fills the gap completely.

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 'Compare search analytics data between two time periods,' which is a specific verb+resource operation. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_search_analytics, which imply single-period queries, and from other analytics tools.

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 implies the use case via 'between two time periods' and provides guidance on selecting the correct site_url property, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool versus siblings. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or comparisons.

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