gsc_delete_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 of disclosing side effects. While 'Deletes' signals a destructive action, it does not state whether the operation is irreversible, whether it affects the live sitemap file, what confirmations are required, or what happens after deletion. For a destructive tool, this is a meaningful gap.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and readable, though it omits contextual details that other dimensions cover. As pure conciseness and structure, it is effective.

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 tool is simple and its parameters are well documented, but the absence of annotations and output schema leaves the description as the only context. It lacks guidance on destructive consequences, authorization requirements, and appropriate preconditions, so an agent calling this tool has an incomplete picture.

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 100%, and both parameters have meaningful descriptions in the schema: 'Site URL' and 'Full URL of the sitemap to delete'. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, but the schema already handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 states a specific verb ('Deletes'), a specific resource ('sitemap'), and a specific platform ('Search Console'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like gsc_submit_sitemap and gsc_get_sitemap. There is no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites such as site ownership, authentication, or whether the sitemap must already exist. The agent must infer usage context from the operation name alone.

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