get_sitemap_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It adds meaningful context about site_url semantics (domain vs subdomain filtering) but does not disclose return format, errors, rate limits, or confirm that it is a read-only operation beyond the 'get' verb. Useful but incomplete.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-sentence purpose followed by parameter details. Every line adds value, with no fluff. The formatting improves scannability.

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?

This is a simple two-parameter get tool with an output schema available, so the description need not explain return values. It covers both parameters and adds site_url nuance. Missing comparison to sibling tools is a minor gap given the tool's standalone clarity.

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 schema provides only parameter names and types (both strings) with 0% description coverage. The description compensates by explaining site_url meaning, providing an example, and adding guidance on domain-property filtering. sitemap_url is only described as 'the full URL', which is adequate but less detailed.

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 opens with a clear verb and resource: 'Get detailed information about a specific sitemap.' This distinguishes it from listing-oriented siblings like get_sitemaps and list_sitemaps_enhanced, though it does not explicitly name contrasting tools.

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?

Provides useful context on how to supply site_url (exact GSC property from list_properties, domain property coverage) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. The guidance is contextual, not comparative.

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