gsc_build_content_action_queue

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

Explicitly declares read-only and that it does not mutate Search Console state. With no annotations, this is good, though rate limits or data freshness are unaddressed.

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?

Description is brief (3 sentences) and front-loaded with purpose. No redundancy, but could be slightly more informative without bloat.

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?

Despite an output schema existing, the large number of parameters (12) with no description coverage leaves significant gaps. The agent lacks guidance on parameter values like dates, thresholds, and dimensions.

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 0% and description provides no explanation for any of the 12 parameters, leaving their meaning and usage entirely to 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?

Clearly states it builds a read-only prioritized content-opportunity action queue using Search Analytics. Distinguishes from sibling tools by naming specific alternative queues.

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?

Describes what it returns but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives like gsc_build_cannibalization_decision_queue. Context is implied but not directive.

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