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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds useful context beyond that: the entries come from a 'public' sitemap (implying no auth) and are 'capped' in volume. It stops short of describing pagination behavior or how capping interacts with the limit.

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, scan-oriented terms (capped, public, one, child sitemap) front-loaded, and the dependency instruction placed second. Nothing is wasted.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and both parameters are documented in the schema. The only gap is the unstated relationship between the 'type' parameter and the 'child sitemap' concept the description asks the agent to select.

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. 'Capped' loosely maps to the limit parameter, but the description frames selection as choosing a 'child sitemap' while the schema's discriminator is a `type` section value (products, pages, blogs, etc.). That slight mismatch leaves the description adding little beyond the schema.

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 (fetch) and resource (URL entries from one public Rothy's child sitemap) with scope qualifiers ('capped', 'one', 'public'). It is clearly distinguished from the sibling rothys_sitemaps, which is named as the discovery tool.

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 the agent: 'Use rothys_sitemaps to discover the available sitemap URLs before selecting a child sitemap,' naming the prerequisite tool and ordering the workflow. There is no ambiguity about when this tool applies versus its sibling.

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