Add property

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose a meaningful behavioral trait not in the schema: the property is created in an unverified state pending gsc_verify_site. It omits auth/permission requirements, idempotency or duplicate-property behavior, and side effects, leaving notable gaps for a no-annotation 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.

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

Two short sentences with zero filler, front-loading the core action and following with the lifecycle constraint. Every sentence 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?

For a single-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the essential lifecycle context an agent needs. It is close to complete but omits edge-case behavior (existing property, permission failures) that would matter for a mutation call.

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?

There is a single parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, with the schema already documenting the accepted siteUrl formats ('https://example.com/' or 'sc-domain:example.com'). The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline of 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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Add a property to Search Console for the connected account.' It also distinguishes itself from the sibling gsc_verify_site by noting that the property remains unverified after this call, so an agent can tell the two apart without opening either schema.

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?

States a clear lifecycle context — the property stays unverified until gsc_verify_site succeeds — which tells the agent this tool is step one of a two-step flow. It does not, however, state exclusions or prerequisites such as what happens if the property already exists or what account/permission state is required.

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