List Sitemaps Tool

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

The readOnlyHint=true annotation already establishes this as a safe read operation, so the description's burden is lower. It adds only the 'submitted for a site' scoping nuance; it does not mention result limits or ordering, and with an output schema present, return-format details are unnecessary.

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 short sentence with zero filler, front-loading the verb and resource. Nothing could be trimmed without losing meaning.

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 simple one-parameter read tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint, the description covers the essential scope. It could add minor context such as what happens if no sitemaps are submitted, but it is largely complete given the structured metadata.

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 description coverage is 100% for the single site_url parameter, so the schema already carries the parameter documentation. The description adds no syntax or format guidance beyond what the schema provides, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('List') and resource ('sitemaps') with a clear scope ('submitted for a site'). It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like get_sitemap_tool or list_sites_tool, leaving that inference to the agent.

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 when-to-use guidance, prerequisites, or alternatives. An agent cannot tell from the text alone when to prefer this over get_sitemap_tool for a single sitemap or submit_sitemap_tool for additions.

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