Open the GSC dashboard

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe, non-mutating call. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the dashboard is 'local' and opens in the browser, so the agent knows the effect is a client-side UI launch, not a server-side mutation or a data payload. It does not say whether a connection must exist first, whether a local server/port is started, or whether anything is returned.

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, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with the parenthetical section list as a compact scope statement. Nothing is wasted and nothing important is buried.

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 parameterless, non-mutating UI tool with no output schema, the description covers what happens and where. The main remaining gap is the prerequisite/state dependency (whether a connected site is required, what happens if none is connected), which matters for a dashboard that renders site-specific data.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, which is the baseline-4 case; there is nothing for the description to clarify or compensate for. No parameter documentation is needed.

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 specific verb and resource ('Open the local Search Console dashboard') and enumerates what the dashboard contains (performance, queries, pages, opportunities, indexing). This clearly separates it from data-returning siblings like gsc_search_analytics, though it never names or contrasts an alternative explicitly.

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 phrase 'in the user's browser' implicitly signals this is a visual/UI action rather than a data fetch, which is the main routing decision an agent faces here. But there is no explicit when-to-use condition, no mention of prerequisites (e.g. an active gsc_connect session), and no named alternative for retrieving the same data programmatically.

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