webmaster_query_analytics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds the useful 500-row cap but otherwise repeats 'Read-only' and omits auth requirements, pagination behavior, and rate limits.

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?

Two short sentences are front-loaded and efficient, but 'Read-only' is redundant with the readOnlyHint annotation and does not earn its place; still, there is no filler.

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 7-parameter analytics tool with 0% schema descriptions and multiple enums, the description is too thin. Output schema covers return values, but required host_id, pagination, filter object shape, and device_type_indicator remain unexplained.

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 7 parameters, so the description carries full burden. It gestures at region and text/statistic filters but does not explain host_id, limit/offset, the filters object, device_type_indicator enum, or default semantics; device filtering is entirely absent.

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 identifies the resource (query/URL analytics) and scope (region, text/statistic filters, up to 500 rows), and distinguishes it from webmaster_list_popular_queries by calling itself 'deeper'. The verb is implied rather than explicit, but an agent can tell it apart from siblings.

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 names a sibling and indicates this tool is 'deeper', which implies when to choose it over webmaster_list_popular_queries. However, it gives no explicit conditions (e.g., 'use when you need region/device breakdowns') or when-not, leaving selection partly inferential.

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