webmaster_list_pro_dates

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/idempotent/destructive=false and openWorld, so safety is covered; the description redundantly repeats 'Read-only'. Its one genuine addition beyond annotations is the ~550-day retention limit, but it omits date format, verification requirements, or whether results are paginated.

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?

A single compact sentence with the resource and the retention constraint front-loaded. No filler, though 'Read-only' is wasted given the annotations already state it.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and for a simple read-only listing tool the description covers purpose and scope. The main residual gap is that it says nothing about the required host_id input.

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% for the single required parameter host_id, and the description makes no mention of it. For a 1-param tool whose parameter is entirely undocumented in the schema, the description should explain what host_id refers to, but does not.

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 resource (available dates for the enhanced SERP-query export) and even cites the endpoint path (GET …/pro/serp/dates). It is clearly distinguished in substance from siblings like webmaster_get_pro_limits or webmaster_start_pro_export, though it never names them explicitly to steer selection.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is called to discover valid dates before running a pro export, but the description never states when to use it versus webmaster_get_pro_limits or webmaster_start_pro_export, nor any preconditions (e.g., host verification).

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