search_analytics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says the tool 'queries' and returns four metrics. It does not mention limits, pagination, data freshness, permissions, or the lack of side effects, leaving agents without safety or constraint awareness.

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?

Two short sentences, no filler, and the core query-plus-output information is front-loaded. The definition is well-sized for a tool whose parameter details live in the schema.

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?

For a query tool with 100% schema coverage, the description plus schema is minimally viable: it names the data source, the output metrics, and all parameters are documented. However, with no output schema and no annotations, the absence of usage guidance, filter behavior, and limits leaves clear gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already fully documents all ten parameters. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning and instead focuses on return metrics; the baseline of 3 is appropriate since the structured schema handles parameter semantics.

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 identifies a specific verb-resource pair ('Query search analytics data') and states the returned metrics, making it clear this is a read-only analytics retrieval tool. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as list_sites or inspect_url, though the distinct resource domain is apparent.

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 guidance about when to choose this tool over the sibling tools, and no mention of prerequisites or exclusions. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and the mention of Google Search Console metrics.

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