Lists all sitemaps for a verified Google Search Console property so you can audit submitted sitemap URLs and statuses.
Lista los sitemaps de una propiedad de Google Search Console.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| siteUrl | Yes | URL exacta de la propiedad verificada. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.3.2Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive and openWorld, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that – no mention of what a sitemap entry contains, whether errors/warnings per sitemap are included, or any rate/auth considerations.
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?
One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity is part of why guidance is missing.
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 simple one-parameter read tool with rich annotations, a minimal description is almost sufficient. However, with no output schema, the agent gets no hint about what the returned sitemap listing contains or how it differs from gsc_sitemap_details.
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 is a single parameter with 100% schema description coverage ('URL exacta de la propiedad verificada'), so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no extra meaning such as format examples or where to obtain the exact 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?
States a specific verb ('Lista') and resource ('sitemaps') scoped to a Google Search Console property. It is clear on its own, but it never distinguishes itself from the sibling gsc_sitemap_details, which an agent could easily confuse for sitemap-level information.
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 gives no condition for when to use this versus gsc_sitemap_details, nor any prerequisite beyond what the schema already requires. Usage is only inferable from the verb 'Lista'.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.