top_queries

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'find top queries' without explaining output format, required fields (e.g., siteUrl is likely necessary), ordering, or rate limits. This is insufficient for an agent to understand side effects or dependencies.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. It earns its place but could include more information without sacrificing brevity.

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 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It fails to explain return values, required parameters, or pagination, leaving significant gaps for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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?

All 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema, so baseline is 3. The description adds minimal value by mentioning 'page filtering' (mapping to pageContains), but does not enhance understanding of other params 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 verb 'find' and resource 'top queries', and mentions optional page filtering. However, it does not specify what defines 'top' (e.g., impressions, clicks), which limits precision, especially when compared to siblings like 'top_pages'.

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 notes usefulness for 'keyword and content research', providing implied context, but lacks explicit guidance on when to avoid this tool or how it differs from siblings like 'search_analytics' or 'search_intent_breakdown'.

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