get_search_engine_info

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It does disclose that the operation is a read-only retrieval and describes the return value, which is helpful. But it omits explicit behavioral context such as authentication requirements, error conditions, or any side effects, so transparency is only adequate.

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 compact and well-structured with clear Args and Returns sections. Every sentence carries needed information and there is no fluff or redundancy.

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 one-parameter metadata getter with an output schema, the description is mostly complete: it states the purpose, the required argument, and the kind of return value. The main gap is the lack of an explicit authentication prerequisite, which matters because sibling tools include start_google_auth.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does this by explaining that user_google_email is 'The user's Google email address' and marking it as required, adding real meaning beyond the bare string type in the schema. It could add format or examples, but for a single simple parameter this is sufficient.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieves metadata about a Programmable Search Engine.' It also names the concrete return content ('configuration and available refinements'), so an agent can clearly distinguish this from sibling tools like search_custom or get_spreadsheet_info.

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 use case is implied: call this when you need metadata about a Programmable Search Engine for the given user. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it, no stated prerequisite like first calling start_google_auth, and no mention of alternative tools for similar metadata needs.

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