Skip to main content
Glama
debanjanbasu

grr

by debanjanbasu
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Rust
Local

searchconsole.sitemaps.delete

Deletes a sitemap from the Search Console Sitemaps report. Use it to remove a sitemap entry; this does not stop Google crawling and cannot be undone.

Instructions

Deletes a sitemap from the Sitemaps report. Does not stop Google from crawling this sitemap or the URLs that were previously crawled in the deleted sitemap [HTTP DELETE] — removes the resource; irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow; refused under --readonly safety profiles. Returns the post-delete resource state (or empty) as JSON — request bodies are built from the typed parameters (typed flags win over the params map), or read whole from body_file Siblings over the same resource: get, list, submit.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
queryNoExtra KEY=VALUE query pairs for endpoints whose parameters Discovery does not describe.
paramsNoParameter map merged into the request; typed parameters win.
dry_runNoReturn the request that would be sent, without sending it.
siteUrlYes[URL path segment] The site's URL, including protocol. For example: `http://www.example.com/`.
feedpathYes[URL path segment] The URL of the actual sitemap. For example: `http://www.example.com/sitemap.xml`.
body_fileNoRead the request body from this file ('-' for stdin) instead of building one from the parameters.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • changedInput schema / properties / feedpath / description
      Previous value: -"The URL of the actual sitemap. For example: `http://www.example.com/sitemap.xml`."New value: +"[URL path segment] The URL of the actual sitemap. For example: `http://www.example.com/sitemap.xml`."
    • changedInput schema / properties / siteUrl / description
      Previous value: -"The site's URL, including protocol. For example: `http://www.example.com/`."New value: +"[URL path segment] The site's URL, including protocol. For example: `http://www.example.com/`."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses HTTP DELETE semantics, irreversibility, the readonly-profile refusal, and that it returns the post-delete resource state. The 'irreversible unless the API documents a trash/undo flow' phrasing hedges rather than giving concrete auth/permission requirements, keeping it just short of a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Purpose is front-loaded, but the return-value sentence runs into request-body assembly and the sibling list with no punctuation break ('...body_file Siblings over the same resource...'), producing an awkward run-on that mixes three unrelated topics and dilutes the key 'does not stop crawling' point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema and no annotations, yet the description covers return value, irreversibility, safety-profile behavior, and sibling relationships – enough for an agent to call a destructive delete correctly. Only concrete permission/auth requirements are absent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so all six parameters are already documented, making 3 the baseline. The description adds precedence semantics (typed params win over the params map, body_file overrides parameter-built bodies) but says nothing about siteUrl or feedpath meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Deletes a sitemap from the Sitemaps report') and immediately clarifies the crucial non-obvious scope: that it does not stop Google from crawling the sitemap or its previously crawled URLs. The closing sibling list (get, list, submit) lets an agent distinguish this from the related operations on the same resource.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Adds a real usage constraint ('refused under --readonly safety profiles') and a semantic warning about what the deletion does and does not accomplish. It names the sibling set but does not explicitly contrast when to call submit instead of delete, so the routing guidance is implied rather than spelled out.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools