List sitemaps

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

With no annotations, the description must cover behavioral traits. It is a read-only operation implied by 'list', but the description does not explicitly mention side effects, permissions, or rate limits. It does convey the primary action and return data, but lacks explicit transparency about non-obvious behaviors.

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?

Single, succinct sentence with clear structure: verb first, then object, then additional detail. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple list operation with two parameters and no output schema. It mentions the type of data returned (submission dates, indexed counts), giving a good expectation. Could be slightly more explicit about output format but overall complete.

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 cover both parameters comprehensively (100% coverage). The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the action (list), the resource (submitted sitemaps), and the property context. It also specifies the returned data (submission dates, indexed counts), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_sites or get_sitemap.

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?

Implies usage for listing all sitemaps for a property, but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as gsc_get_sitemap (for a single sitemap) or gsc_list_sites (for properties). No when-not to use guidance is provided.

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