list_sitemaps

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It explicitly instructs the agent to base analysis only on returned data, avoid speculation, and admit insufficient information. This is valuable behavioral context beyond the simple list operation, though it does not detail response pagination or site scope.

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 primary purpose is stated in the first sentence, followed by important usage instructions. The extra sentences are purposeful to prevent hallucinated analysis, but the description is slightly longer than strictly necessary for a simple list tool.

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 zero parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context about the tool's purpose and output fields. The analysis guidelines further help an agent handle results responsibly. It is sufficiently complete for correct invocation and result interpretation.

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 has zero parameters, so schema coverage is trivially complete. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description does not need to add parameter details. Any additional parameter semantics would be irrelevant.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('sitemaps submitted for the site'), and clearly lists the returned information (status, errors, warnings, indexed page counts). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like submit_sitemap or quick_wins.

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 implies its use for retrieving sitemap submission data, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. The added analysis instructions are about interpretation, not about when to invoke the tool.

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