get_performance_overview

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

With no annotations, the description carries the disclosure burden. It provides useful context about domain properties covering all subdomains and the default lookback period, but it does not describe what the overview includes, rate limits, or other behavioral traits expected of a read tool.

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 is concise: a one-line purpose followed by clearly organized parameter Args. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is scannable and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters, and the output schema exists, so return values are covered. However, the 'filter by page' instruction is ambiguous given the tool lacks a page filter, and there is no guidance on what metrics the overview includes, leaving a small but notable gap.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description fully compensates by explaining site_url format, examples, and the nuance of domain properties, and by defining days with its default. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's bare types and defaults.

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 tool retrieves a 'performance overview' for a 'specific property,' using a specific verb and resource. It is distinct from siblings like get_search_analytics, though it does not explicitly call out the difference.

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?

It gives a clear prerequisite: use the exact URL from list_properties, and explains domain property coverage. However, the instruction to 'filter by page' is confusing because the tool has no page parameter, and it does not say when to prefer this over search analytics or other tools.

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