colehaan_sitemaps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does useful work: it identifies the exact source URL, states that the storefront is fixed server-side, and warns that sitemap types are inferred. It does not mention output format or potential failure modes, but for a zero-parameter read-only list this is reasonably 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?

Three short sentences with no filler; the main action is front-loaded and the caveats follow naturally.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description supplies the source URL, the returned data, and the inference caveat. It is slightly incomplete only in not clarifying how the returned child sitemap URLs are structured or how it relates to colehaan_sitemap_urls.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema already covers everything. The description adds value by explaining why no storefront parameter is needed, which preempts an agent looking for a way to change the retailer URL.

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?

Description names a specific verb and resource: lists Cole Haan's sitemaps by reading child URLs from the /sitemap.xml index. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from sibling colehaan_sitemap_urls or other brand sitemap tools.

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?

No guidance is given about when to choose this tool over colehaan_sitemap_urls or other sitemap tools. The only contextual hint is that the storefront URL is fixed server-side, which explains the absence of a store parameter but does not provide when/when-not instructions.

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