Register a property

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

Adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the annotations: the property remains unverified and returns no data until ownership is proven, and duplicate adds are no-ops rather than errors. These are exactly the lifecycle and idempotency details an agent needs for a mutation tool, and they align with the annotation hints rather than contradicting them.

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?

Three tightly written sentences, front-loaded with the core action and immediately followed by the critical caveat and next steps. Every sentence contributes useful information with no filler.

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 lack of an output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's effect and post-conditions, and the detailed input schema covers parameter nuances. It could say more about what the call itself returns on success, but for this registration step the lifecycle guidance is strong enough.

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 both parameters, including the important URL-prefix vs domain-property distinction and the account selection. The description adds no further parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('register/add') and resource ('property in Search Console'), and distinguishes the operation from sibling tools by clarifying that it only adds and leaves the property unverified. An agent can tell this apart from get_site, list_sites, delete_site, and verify_site directly from the description.

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?

Gives clear context for when this is the right tool and explicitly names the follow-up tools get_verification_token and verify_site. It also usefully notes that re-adding an existing property is a no-op rather than an error. It stops short of explicitly stating when not to use it or naming alternatives like list_sites for inspection, so it is clear but not fully exhaustive.

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