Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Google Search Console Connector

Google Search Console Connector

by malaysherasia-ai
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Local

Add chart note

gsc_add_annotation

Add a dated note to a project's performance chart, such as after SEO changes, so traffic movements can be matched to specific updates in the dashboard.

Instructions

Add a dated note to this project's performance chart, e.g. after deploying SEO changes ('Rewrote service page titles'). Shown in the dashboard so changes can be matched to traffic movements.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "text": "<text>"
    },
    "name": "gsc_add_annotation"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
dateNoDefault today
textYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.2

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It does disclose the visible effect — the note appears on the dashboard chart and is dated — which is real value. However, it omits permission requirements, whether notes can be edited/deleted, or any limits, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, and the example earns its place by clarifying note content. No filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter write tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers what it does and where the result surfaces. It stops short of disclosure on returns or permissioning, but nothing essential to correct invocation is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%: `date` is documented there as 'Default today', while `text` has only length constraints. The description implies the note body via the example but adds no format, length, or date syntax guidance beyond what the schema already says.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a dated note to this project's performance chart') plus a concrete example of the note content. The purpose is unmistakable and no sibling tool covers annotations, so an agent can pick it out immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear usage context ('after deploying SEO changes') and the motivation (matching changes to traffic movements). It does not state when not to use it or name any alternative, but no sibling overlaps, so the guidance is sufficient.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools