Get sitemap details

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is established. The description adds that the operation returns status and details of a submitted sitemap, but it does not disclose additional behavioral context such as error conditions, rate limits, or special case handling. This is acceptable but not richly transparent.

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, focused sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for a simple read-only getter and front-loads the core purpose immediately.

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 two-parameter read-only tool with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description is complete enough to support correct invocation. It clarifies that the tool targets a single submitted sitemap, while the schema covers the required parameter semantics and the annotations cover safety.

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 100%, and both parameters already have detailed descriptions, including site_url format guidance and a note about permission errors. The tool description does not add parameter-level meaning, but the schema carries the full burden, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('status and details of a single sitemap submitted to Google Search Console'). It clearly identifies what the tool does and, by saying 'single sitemap,' implicitly distinguishes it from sitemaps.list, which deals with multiple sitemaps.

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 provides no explicit guidance about when to use this tool versus the sibling sitemaps.list, sitemaps.submit, or sitemaps.delete. It implies use for an individual sitemap's details but gives no alternative selection criteria or exclusions.

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