Search Console overview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds that the tool will indicate if GSC is not connected, which is a useful behavioral cue. It also notes the tool is free, but that's more of a commercial detail than behavior. Overall, it provides context beyond the annotations without 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?

The description is two sentences, with the most important usage guidance front-loaded ('Use this before touching SEO'). It packs purpose, specific metrics, prerequisite, and error behavior without redundancy. 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?

For a simple tool with 0 required parameters, no output schema, and read-only annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does, what data it returns, who it applies to (user's own site), and the prerequisite connection status. No further details are needed for the agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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?

There is only one parameter (range_days) with schema description coverage at 100% (it states '28 (default) or 90'). The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 provides an overview of Google Search Console data (clicks/impressions trend, device split, period comparison) for the user's own site. It distinguishes from siblings like gsc_pages and gsc_queries by positioning itself as a general overview and claiming 'numbers no other tool has.' The verb is implied ('use before touching SEO') but the resource and scope are specific.

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?

It explicitly says when to use it: 'before touching SEO on the user's own site.' It mentions a prerequisite (GSC connected at tracetify.com/dashboard/gsc) and that the tool will report if not connected. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or exclude use cases, but the timing and context are clear enough.

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