list_sitemaps

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the core operation. It does not state read-only intent, side effects, site_url format expectations, or return behavior, adding no information beyond the action itself.

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?

A single sentence states the action and scope with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an ambiguous optional parameter, this description is incomplete. It fails to describe what the response contains, how to supply the site, or when to use the tool, leaving an agent to guess.

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 already documents site_url with 'The site URL', providing 100% parameter coverage. The tool description adds the context that sitemaps are listed for the site, but it does not clarify whether site_url is required or how it should be formatted given that 0 parameters are required.

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 uses the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource—'sitemaps submitted for a site'—which distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_sites and submit_sitemap. It unambiguously names the object and scope.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_sites or submit_sitemap. There is no mention of prerequisites, when a sitemap list would be needed, or how site_url should be selected.

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