get_sitemap_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get details' only conveys the read-only nature inherent in the verb, but it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits such as required authentication, error behavior, or response specifics. This is a minimal disclosure without meaningful transparency beyond the obvious.

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 one short sentence with no superfluous words. It is immediately readable and front-loaded with the essential action. This is exemplary conciseness.

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 an output schema present, return values need not be explained. However, the description does not mention any preconditions (e.g., the sitemap must exist) or provide usage context beyond the basic purpose. It is minimally sufficient for a simple getter but not fully complete in guiding the agent's decision-making.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the tool description adds no extra parameter insight. Both required parameters are clearly defined in the schema, allowing the agent to understand inputs without additional narrative. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already does the heavy lifting.

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 'Get details for a specific sitemap' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('specific sitemap'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_sitemaps_tool (which lists all) and submit/delete variants. This is unambiguous and effectively differentiates from alternatives.

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 implies use when needing details on one sitemap, but it does not explicitly state when to use versus alternatives, nor does it provide exclusions or preconditions. Usage context is left to the agent to infer from the tool name and schema, making it adequate but not explicit.

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