indexing_publish

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It does not mention whether the operation is idempotent, any authentication requirements, rate limits, or what the return value is (no output schema). The description only says 'Notify Google,' lacking details on side effects or failure modes.

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 sentences with no extraneous information. The first sentence states the purpose, the second provides parameter guidance. Every word 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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and no output schema. The description adequately covers the main purpose and parameter usage, but fails to mention what happens after the notification (e.g., if it's synchronous, if there's a response). Given the lack of output schema and the presence of multiple siblings, a slightly more complete description would be beneficial, but the current version is minimally adequate.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying the semantics of the 'type' enum (when to use each value), which is not evident from the schema alone. This justifies a score of 4.

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?

The description clearly states the action: 'Notify Google about a URL update or removal via the Indexing API.' It identifies the specific resource (URLs) and the action (notify), and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tool 'indexing_batch_publish' by focusing on a single URL.

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 description provides guidance on choosing the 'type' parameter (URL_UPDATED vs URL_DELETED), which helps the agent use the tool correctly. However, it does not compare this tool to alternatives like indexing_batch_publish or indexing_get_metadata, leaving the agent without advice on when to use this tool over others.

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