gsc_search_analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the capability of 'optional dimensions and filters' but does not disclose any deeper behavioral details such as data freshness, pagination, result structure, or API limits. This is acceptable given the annotations but adds minimal extra transparency.

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 concise sentence with the core function front-loaded: 'Query clicks, impressions, CTR, and average position.' It avoids unnecessary words and is easy to scan, making it highly efficient.

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 tool with 9 parameters, no output schema, and numerous sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not mention the required parameters (siteUrl, startDate, endDate), clarify return values beyond listing metrics, or explain how this generic tool relates to the specialized siblings. The low schema coverage and lack of output schema increase the burden, which the description fails to meet.

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 only 11% (only siteUrl has a description), so the description must compensate for the other 8 parameters. It mentions 'dimensions and filters' generically but fails to explain parameters like type, dataState, maxRows, aggregationType, or how to choose dimension values. The schema's enums help but do not clarify the semantics of each parameter.

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 Search Console metrics (clicks, impressions, CTR, position) with optional dimensions and filters. It is specific enough to convey the core purpose, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like gsc_query_pages or gsc_query_queries, which are narrower variants.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this generic analytics query versus the specialized sibling tools (e.g., gsc_query_pages, gsc_query_queries). The description does not mention comparison to alternatives, prerequisites, or typical use cases, leaving the selection decision to the agent.

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