submit_sitemap

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It states the behavioral effect ('Triggers Google to recrawl'), but does not disclose permissions, rate limits, or response format. The IMPORTANT instruction about analysis is more about agent conduct than tool behavior, adding limited transparency.

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 three sentences, with the first two concisely stating purpose and effect. The third sentence is a longer IMPORTANT instruction that adds operational guidance, but is still focused and not redundant.

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 explains the action and mentions 'data returned' but does not specify the return value or structure. With no output schema and no annotations, this lack of return-value detail leaves a gap for a simple tool.

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 input schema covers the single parameter (sitemap_url) fully, including its default behavior. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the tool's function: 'Notify Google of a new or updated sitemap. Triggers Google to recrawl the sitemap and discover new pages.' It uses a specific verb (notify) and resource (sitemap), distinguishing it from sibling tools like submit_url or submit_batch.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: for notifying Google of new or updated sitemaps. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is straightforward and the sibling tool list implies other submission methods.

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