Map a site

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: URL discovery comes from sitemaps/robots.txt/homepage links and no pages are fetched, which tells the agent this is a cheap, non-rendering discovery call. It doesn't mention output volume, ordering, or rate-limit behavior, so not a 5.

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?

Two sentences, zero filler, with the mechanism and the no-page-fetch guarantee front-loaded before the usage hint. Every clause earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description should at least imply the shape of the result (a list of URLs) and help with the ambiguous parameters. It does convey the return is URLs, but leaves the sitemap mode enum, limit semantics and subdomain/query-parameter flags unexplained for a 6-parameter 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?

Four of six parameters (limit, sitemap, includeSubdomains, ignoreQueryParameters) have no schema description at all, and the description mentions none of them. The 'sitemap' enum with include/skip/only modes is semantically load-bearing and completely unexplained, forcing the agent to guess.

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?

States a specific verb ('List the URLs') and resource ('of a website'), plus the mechanism (sitemaps, robots.txt, homepage links) and the key constraint 'without fetching each page'. That last clause is exactly what separates it from pagesift_scrape and pagesift_crawl without needing to open their schemas.

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?

'Use it to find the right page before scraping, or to plan a batch scrape' gives clear when-to-use context and implicitly routes agents toward scrape/batch_scrape as the next step. It never names those siblings explicitly or says when not to use this tool, 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.