remove_sitemap

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 the action ('Remove') but lacks details on permissions required, whether the removal is reversible, potential side effects (e.g., impact on indexing), rate limits, or error conditions. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place in conveying the essential purpose.

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 a mutation tool with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and an output schema (which helps but isn't described), the description is incomplete. It lacks parameter semantics, behavioral context (e.g., irreversible deletion), and usage guidelines, making it insufficient for safe and effective tool invocation by an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate but provides no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'site_url' and 'sitemap_url' represent, their formats, or how they relate (e.g., sitemap must belong to the site). This leaves both parameters undocumented beyond their names in the schema.

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 action ('Remove') and resource ('a sitemap from Bing'), making the purpose immediately understandable. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'submit_sitemap' by focusing on removal rather than submission, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with other removal tools like 'remove_blocked_url'.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the purpose implies it's for removing sitemaps, there's no mention of prerequisites (e.g., sitemap must exist), context (e.g., after submission errors), or comparison to related tools like 'remove_feed' or 'submit_sitemap' for correction scenarios.

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