get_advanced_search_analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It mentions the tool filters and returns analytics, but does not disclose data lag (e.g., results trailing by 2 days), potential rate limits, pagination behavior beyond 'pagination' mention, or whether data is aggregated. The description is too minimal to convey these operational traits.

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?

The description is a single dense sentence that front-loads the core purpose ('Search analytics with full control') and quickly enumerates the main capabilities. It is efficient with no filler, though slightly long due to the enumeration. Structurally it is clear and scannable.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (16 parameters, 6 enums, multiple filters), the description is notably incomplete as a standalone guide. It does not mention that only siteUrl is required, that date ranges can be specified via days or start/end dates, that defaults exist, or that filter operators are available. The schema covers these, but the description should provide an overview to help an agent decide initially whether this tool fits; it doesn't.

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 input schema provides 100% parameter descriptions, so the description adds little beyond summarizing the existing parameters. It lists filter types and options that map directly to schema fields, but does not introduce new semantics or clarify edge cases. Baseline 3 is appropriate given high schema coverage.

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 that this tool provides search analytics and highlights its advanced filtering and control options (country, device, query, page, search type, aggregation, data state, pagination). It distinguishes itself from the simpler 'get_search_analytics' by emphasizing 'full control', so the purpose is unambiguous and not a tautology.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like 'get_search_analytics', 'get_performance_overview', or 'compare_search_periods'. The description implies advanced use but does not state when to prefer it over alternatives or under what conditions it is inappropriate. An agent would have to infer usage context.

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