Tech QA — technical SEO signals

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds that records are returned with inlined content (v7) and mentions the inline parameter controlling legacy v6 behavior. This clarifies the payload version but does not reveal other behavioral traits beyond annotations.

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?

Very concise: two short sentences. No filler or repetition. Could potentially include more detail without harming conciseness, but current structure is efficient.

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 (one boolean param, no output schema). The description covers the payload contract versions. However, it does not explain what 'technical SEO signals' means in terms of data fields, nor does it contrast with sibling tools. Adequate for basic use but lacks depth.

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 100% with the inline parameter having a clear description. The description reinforces that inlined content is the default (v7) and metadata-only is legacy v6, but adds little new meaning beyond the schema.

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 returns records with inlined content (v7 payload) for technical SEO signals. The title 'Tech QA — technical SEO signals' gives a distinct purpose, differentiating it from sibling presets like quality or topical. However, it doesn't elaborate on what 'technical SEO signals' includes.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling presets (e.g., gkb_preset_quality, gkb_preset_topical). The description does not specify suitable scenarios or exclude alternatives.

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