list_properties

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states that the tool lists properties but does not explicitly mention whether it is read-only, if it requires special permissions, or if there are any side effects. Since listing is inherently read-only, the description is acceptable but could be more transparent.

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, concise sentence that directly conveys the tool's function without any fluff or redundant information. It is perfectly sized for quick comprehension.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must indicate what the tool returns. It mentions 'with permission levels', which gives some insight, but it does not specify the exact structure (e.g., list of objects, pagination, fields beyond permissions). The description is sufficient for basic understanding but lacks detailed return format information.

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 has no parameters, and the schema is fully covered (100%). The description correctly implies that no parameters are needed, and there is nothing to explain. This is a case where the absence of parameters makes the description complete.

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 tool's purpose with a specific verb ('List') and scope ('all Google Search Console properties the authenticated account can access'), and it includes the additional detail about permission levels. This leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when to use get_site_details or get_search_analytics. However, the purpose is straightforward and self-evident for listing all properties, so the lack of explicit guidance is acceptable but not ideal.

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