list_sitemaps

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states what the tool does but doesn't mention whether it's read-only, has rate limits, requires specific permissions, returns paginated results, or handles errors. This leaves significant gaps in understanding the tool's behavior.

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 efficiently structured with a clear purpose statement followed by parameter details. Both sentences earn their place, though the parameter explanation could be slightly more integrated rather than appearing as a separate 'Args:' section.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (which reduces the need to describe return values) but no annotations and only basic parameter documentation, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core function and parameter but lacks behavioral context and usage guidance, making it incomplete for optimal agent understanding.

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 description adds valuable semantic context for the single parameter 'site_url' by explaining it's 'The site URL as it appears in Search Console' and providing format examples. Since schema description coverage is 0%, this compensates well, though it doesn't cover all potential edge cases or validation rules.

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 verb ('Lists') and resource ('submitted sitemaps for a Search Console property'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'list_sites' or 'query_search_analytics', which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_sites' or 'query_search_analytics'. It mentions the required 'site_url' parameter but offers no context about prerequisites, timing, or appropriate use cases beyond the basic function.

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