Find keyword opportunities

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the output fields and sort order, and it notes the one-or-many-properties scope. However, it does not mention default filtering thresholds like minImpressions or maxCtr, the dataState behavior, or how pagination/limits affect results.

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 front-loaded sentence: it immediately establishes the tool's core filter and then states the return shape. Every word contributes meaningful information and there is no filler.

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 16 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, this description is too sparse to be fully actionable. It captures the central use case and return shape, but an agent cannot infer the semantics of most filtering parameters or the site-selection modes without additional context.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for 16 parameters. It only hints at site selection ('across one or many properties') and the impression/CTR thresholds ('high-impression, low-CTR'), leaving device, country, type, dataState, pageContains, queryContains, maxPosition, and other parameters unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb ('Find') with a clear resource ('high-impression, low-CTR queries') and explicitly states what it returns ('clicks, impressions, CTR, and position sorted by impressions'). This clearly separates it from generic analytics siblings like gsc_search_analytics or gsc_top_queries.

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 gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus gsc_top_queries, gsc_search_analytics, or other siblings. There are no exclusions, alternatives, or prerequisites mentioned; the intended use case is only implied by the title and the 'high-impression, low-CTR' phrasing.

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