delete_site

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: it warns that history becomes unreadable until the property is re-added and re-verified, states Google does not offer an undo, and explains the confirm flag. This is exactly the kind of destructive, irreversible context an agent needs.

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, front-loaded with the core action and followed by the critical consequence and safety instruction. No filler or wasted words.

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 description covers the irreversibility, the access loss, and the confirm requirement, which is strong for a destructive mutation. It does not describe the success/error response shape, but with no output schema and a fairly simple operation, this is a minor gap.

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 description coverage is 100%, with rich per-parameter descriptions. The description only adds "Set confirm to true to proceed," which reinforces the schema's confirm parameter without adding new parametric meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 cleanly states the action: "Remove a property from this Google account's Search Console." It names a specific verb and resource, and the term "property" distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_sitemap.

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 purpose and consequences are clear, but the description does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_sitemap or add_site. It implies usage through the action verb, but does not name exclusions or sibling tools.

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