sites_list

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

With no annotations, the description explains the read-only nature (list), but lacks detail on authorization requirements, rate limits, or the meaning of 'verified.' It adds basic behavioral context but could be more informative.

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, well-structured sentence with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with the main verb and resource.

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 one optional parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context to understand the tool's purpose and scope. It could optionally mention the return format, but is still complete enough.

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 coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'engine,' which already has a description and enum. The tool description does not add any further meaning or usage hints beyond what the schema provides.

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 action (list), resource (verified sites/properties), and scope (across all authorized accounts). It distinguishes this generic site list from sibling tools like 'sites_get' (singular) and 'bing_sites_list' (specific to Bing).

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 implies use for listing all sites, but does not explicitly clarify when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'sites_get' (for a single site) or engine-specific listers. No guidance on prerequisites or post-list actions is provided.

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