bing_query_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral transparency. It only states the basic purpose and does not disclose any behavioral traits such as what data is returned (e.g., impressions, clicks), data freshness, rate limits, or whether it requires authentication. This is insufficient for safe invocation.

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 concise sentence. It is front-loaded with the key action. However, it may be too brief to convey necessary context, but it earns points for efficiency.

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 the simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. However, it does not explain what 'search query stats' includes or the format of the response. For an agent, more context on the output would be helpful. So it is adequate but not beyond.

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% (only one parameter with a description). The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline is 3, and since the description simply echoes the schema, it does not enhance parameter understanding.

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 action 'get search query stats' and the target resource 'for a site'. It uses a specific verb and resource, but does not differentiate from siblings like bing_page_query_stats which might also query stats. It is clear but not highly distinctive.

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 usage guidelines are provided. There is no mention of when to use this tool versus siblings like bing_page_query_stats, bing_rank_traffic_stats, or any prerequisites (e.g., the site must be verified). This leaves the agent with no guidance on selection.

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