seo_sitemap_status

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses nothing about permissions required, whether the operation is read-only, or what triggers a status check. The terse phrasing implies a read but does not state it.

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 extremely short, which is concise but under-specified for a tool in a large SEO suite. It does not front-load any useful context, though it wastes no words.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and no description of return values, the definition leaves the agent guessing about what 'status' contains and when to call it. A diagnostic tool in a crowded SEO namespace needs more context to be useful.

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%, and the single parameter 'site' is documented with a reference to list_sites. The description adds no parameter information, but baseline 3 applies when the schema fully covers semantics.

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 sitemap status' restates the tool name with no additional specificity. It does not clarify what 'status' means (e.g., generation state, file presence, ping results) or distinguish it from sibling tools like seo_status or seo_sitemap_ping, making it near-tautological.

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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative guidance is provided. The agent cannot tell whether this should be invoked before seo_sitemap_ping, after seo_update_settings, or as a standalone diagnostic.

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