site_map

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

Annotations include readOnlyHint=true, so the read-only nature is already declared. The description adds that it is 'fast' and 'without scraping content,' which is useful context, but it does not reveal output format, limits, pagination, or error behavior. The added behavioral detail is minimal and does not go significantly beyond the annotations.

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 and well-structured. It opens with a clear one-sentence summary, then provides a brief list of use cases, followed by an Args section. Every sentence is purposeful and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only URL discovery tool, the description covers the core purpose and main use cases. However, gaps remain: the 'config' parameter is unexplained, and there is no mention of the return format or any limits. This leaves some ambiguity for an agent deciding how to invoke the tool and interpret its output.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must carry the parameter semantics. It explains 'url' with an example, but the optional 'config' parameter is completely undocumented. With 1 of 2 parameters unaddressed, the description does not adequately compensate for the missing schema information.

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: 'Discover all URLs on a website without scraping their content.' This uses a specific verb ('Discover') and resource ('URLs on a website'), and explicitly distinguishes it from content-scraping tools by noting it does not scrape content.

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 specific use cases: 'sitemap audits... finding unindexed pages... understanding site architecture, or scoping a crawl before running it.' This gives clear guidance on when to use the tool, but it does not explicitly name alternative tools or say when not to use it, so it stops short of a 5.

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