sonic_sitemap

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden. It discloses that it returns one page of the sitemap, supports pagination via page and page_size, and explains the meaning of section and kind. It does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only or describe output structure in detail, but the browsing nature is implied.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with the primary purpose. It conveys all essential information without excessive verbosity. Each sentence contributes to understanding the tool's function, sections, and result usage.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (two sitemaps, pagination, kind filtering) and lack of output schema, the description covers the key aspects: section selection, page sizes, and how results feed into other endpoints. It does not detail the output format, but the path usage hint provides enough context for an agent to proceed.

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 value by explaining the section values (menu vs. locations) with page counts, clarifying the kind filter options, and noting that paths are used by other endpoints. This enriches the parameter understanding 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?

The description clearly states it browses Sonic Drive-In's menu-page or store-locator sitemap. It specifies two sections (menu and locations) with exact page counts and explains that each entry's path is what GET /sonic/item or GET /sonic/store takes. This distinguishes it from siblings like sonic_item, sonic_store, and sonic_menu.

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 when to use this tool (to discover available menu pages or store locations) and how to chain results with sonic_item and sonic_store. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state conditions for when not to use it, leaving some inference required.

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