Returns Yahoo Shopping sitemap section and seasonal archive links, and directs users to /yahoo-shopping/sitemap for reading archive or date pages.
Yahoo Shopping sitemap section index. Returns the public sitemap's full set of section and seasonal archive links. Use /yahoo-shopping/sitemap to read an archive or date page.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.17.18Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does disclose that the result is a set of links from the 'public sitemap', which implies a safe read of public data. It says nothing about authentication, rate limits, or result volume, so the behavioural picture is only partially filled in.
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, front-loaded with what is returned and followed by the follow-up route. Every clause earns its place with no filler.
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 index tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what is returned (section and seasonal archive links) and where to go next. It leaves the return shape (count, ordering, nesting) unspecified, which is a minor gap given the low complexity.
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 zero parameters, so the baseline is 4; there is no parameter syntax the description could add or omit. The description correctly does not waste words on inputs.
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 concrete verb and resource: returns the Yahoo Shopping sitemap's section and seasonal archive links. That distinguishes it from yahoo_shopping_sitemap, which serves archive/date pages, though the distinction is made via a URL path rather than the sibling's tool name.
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 second sentence routes the agent: use /yahoo-shopping/sitemap to read an archive or date page, implying this tool is the index to call first. The alternative is named obliquely as a path rather than as the sibling tool yahoo_shopping_sitemap, and no explicit 'do not use this for X' exclusion is given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.