query_search_analytics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses data lag (~2-3 days) and date format. However, it does not mention pagination behavior, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The transparency is adequate but not thorough.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence defines purpose and output, the second adds critical usage details (date format, lag, dimension examples). Every sentence earns its place.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers key aspects (metrics, grouping, date lag) but omits pagination (startRow, rowLimit), filtering (searchType, queryContains), and behavior details. It is adequate but not fully complete for a complex tool with 9 parameters.

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 89%, so most parameters are documented. The description adds value by providing example dimension arrays and noting date format and data lag, which complements the schema. This extra context justifies a score above baseline.

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 tool queries real Search Console performance data and lists metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, average position) grouped by chosen dimensions. It distinguishes from sibling tools like inspect_url or list_properties by focusing on analytics data.

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 provides context for use (querying performance data) and gives dimension examples, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or exclusions. It implies usage but no when-not-to or comparisons.

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