sync_history

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

Adds substantial context beyond annotations: the 45-second execution window, incremental resume behavior, skip-vs-refresh policy tied to finality/emptiness, and the 16-month retention rationale. Annotations only give readOnly=false, idempotent=true, openWorld=true, destructive=false.

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?

Front-loaded with the core action, then the retention rationale, then skip/refresh policy, then the continuation workflow. Dense but each clause carries operational information; slightly long but not wasteful given complexity.

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 7-param write tool with an output schema present, the description covers the critical behavior an agent needs: resumability, time budget, what is skipped vs refreshed. Omits coverage of four parameters but return shape is handled by the output schema.

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%, so the description must carry the load. It explains 'dimensions' defaults to query,page with country/device as expansion (with 'more rows' tradeoff) and implicitly covers 'days' via the 16-month note, but leaves end_date, start_date, search_type, and refresh_provisional undocumented.

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 ('Copy'), resource ('Search Analytics rows'), and destination ('local SQLite history'). Distinguishes itself from siblings like query_search_analytics (live API query) and history_* (read from local history) by being the ingest path.

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?

Explicitly says when to use it ('keeps data past 16 months'), what gets skipped ('Days already stored and final'), and names the CLI alternative with its advantage ('no time limit; put it in cron'). The call-again-to-continue loop is spelled out.

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