get_sitemap_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It mentions the prerequisite of using an exact GSC property URL from list_properties and explains domain property behavior, but does not explicitly confirm read-only safety, potential errors, or rate limits. The read-only nature is only implied by 'Get detailed information.'

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 concise (~90 words), front-loaded with the purpose, and structured with an 'Args:' list. Every sentence contributes value, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, return details are not the description's responsibility. Both parameters are well-described, and the prerequisite for site_url adds context. However, usage alternatives and explicit safety disclosure are missing, preventing a perfect score.

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 descriptions are 0% covered, so the description compensates well. site_url is thoroughly explained with examples and domain property semantics; sitemap_url is given a basic definition. This adds substantial meaning beyond the bare 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 'Get detailed information about a specific sitemap,' which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like get_sitemaps and list_sitemaps_enhanced by focusing on a single sitemap's details.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description ('specific sitemap'), but there is no explicit statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_sitemaps. It provides parameter-specific guidance (domain vs subdomain) but no exclusions or when-not-to-use.

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