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

Beyond the readOnlyHint/openWorldHint annotations, it discloses concrete operational traits: calls can take ~50 seconds because Jumia challenges connections, and failures come back as a retryable 503. That is exactly the kind of latency-and-retry guidance an agent needs before committing to a long call.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with what is listed and returned, then the follow-up tool, then the bulk-discovery rationale, then the operational caveat. No filler and nothing that could be cut without losing information.

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?

Complete for a two-parameter read tool: it covers what is returned, how to continue to jumia_sitemap_urls, why to prefer it over search, and the timeout/503 behavior. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be further explained.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds marginal value by clarifying that the 'mlps' enum value corresponds to 'curated pages' and that the scope is a single storefront, but it does not elaborate on country code validity beyond pointing at jumia_countries implicitly.

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 verb (lists) and resource (sitemap files) scoped to 'one Jumia storefront', and enumerates the sitemap kinds (products, brands, categories, curated pages) plus the returned fields. An agent can distinguish this from jumia_search or jumia_categories without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes downstream work: 'Pass a returned name to jumia_sitemap_urls to read the URLs in it.' It also names the alternative it replaces ('discover the product catalog in bulk instead of searching'), giving both the continuation path and the when-not-to-use condition.

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