gsc_list_sites

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, open-world, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds the scoping behavior that only properties available to the authenticated account are returned, which is useful context. However, it does not disclose other behaviors like return format or pagination, so it adds limited value beyond the annotations.

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, focused sentence that is front-loaded with the main action. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 list tool with no output schema and strong annotations, the description is complete. It clearly states the purpose and scope, and the annotations cover the safety profile. No additional details are necessary for effective use.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the parameter schema already covers everything. The description doesn't need to explain parameters, and the baseline of 4 applies for zero-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('Search Console properties'), with a clear scope ('available to the authenticated Google account'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like gsc_get_site (which retrieves a single property) and gsc_list_sitemaps (which lists sitemaps).

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 clearly states it lists properties accessible to the authenticated account, giving the context that this is the tool for enumerating available properties. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the use case is obvious from the context.

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