Add URLs to a Search Console property's local inspection queue so you can organize pages for later indexing checks and filter them by source label.
Add URLs to this property's local inspection queue.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| site | Yes | Property: 'sc-domain:example.com', 'https://www.example.com/' or 'example.com' | |
| urls | Yes | Full URLs inside the property | |
| label | No | Source label for filtering later | manual |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description usefully clarifies that the queue is 'local' and per-property, which softens the openWorld expectation, but it says nothing about duplicate handling, queue size limits, or what state the URLs enter until inspections run.
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?
A single sentence with no waste, and the destination ('local inspection queue') is placed before any caveats. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification for a queue-mutating tool.
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 three-parameter enqueue tool with no output schema and adequate annotations, the definition is minimally sufficient. It leaves a gap around what happens after queuing and how the queue is drained, which an agent needs to sequence this tool correctly.
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 100%, so site formats, the URL array, and the 'label' default of 'manual' are all documented structurally. The description adds no meaning beyond that, contributing nothing about how label affects later filtering or whether URLs must be inside the property. Baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a concrete verb and resource ('Add URLs') and a specific destination ('this property's local inspection queue'), which separates it from queue_from_sitemaps and queue_from_performance by implication of a manual, locally-supplied list. It stops short of naming the sibling queue tools, so differentiation is inferential rather than explicit.
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?
There is no when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance at all. The description never tells the agent to prefer queue_from_sitemaps or queue_from_performance when the URLs originate there, nor that run_inspections must be called afterward to actually process the queue; only the word 'queue' hints at the workflow.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.