Discover Sportskeeda's public sitemap sources via Crawlora MCP, then use a returned slug to page through its complete URL set.
Discover Sportskeeda sitemap sources. Returns Sportskeeda's current public sitemaps. Pass a returned slug to /sportskeeda/sitemap-items to page through its complete URL set.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.7Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It discloses this is a read returning 'current public' sitemaps and provides a stable slug used by a downstream tool, which is meaningful behavioral context. It omits details like auth or rate limits, but for a no-param read-only discovery call this is largely sufficient.
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, front-loaded on what the tool is and what it returns. Each sentence earns its place, including the chaining instruction.
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 no output schema and no annotations, the description adequately covers purpose, return nature, and the downstream step for a low-complexity zero-parameter tool. It could say more about what a sitemap entry looks like, but an agent has enough to call it correctly.
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?
The tool takes no parameters (empty schema, 0 params), so the baseline for parameter semantics is 4. There is nothing for the description to disambiguate, and it correctly implies no input is required.
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 ('Discover') and resource ('Sportskeeda sitemap sources') and reinforces it with 'Returns Sportskeeda's current public sitemaps'. It clearly distinguishes this discovery tool from the sibling sportskeeda_sitemap_items, which it names as the paging step.
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 frames the workflow: call this to get sitemaps, then pass a returned slug to /sportskeeda/sitemap-items to enumerate URLs. That gives an agent both when to call this and what to do next. It does not state exclusions, but the sequencing guidance is strong.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.