search_console_sitemaps_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the read-only nature of the operation and gives a detailed return structure, including the raw Webmasters sitemap array with field names and types. However, it does not cover potential error conditions, rate limits, or auth requirements, which would push it to 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.

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

The description is concise and well-structured, front-loading the purpose and then providing essential return details and usage alternatives. Every sentence adds value, and the formatting of the return array is clear and readable. It is neither overly verbose nor under-specified.

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 the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description compensates thoroughly by fully specifying the return structure, read-only nature, and alternative for submission. For a simple list operation with one parameter, this is complete and self-sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with the site_url parameter fully described in the input schema. The description does not add extra semantic detail beyond referring to 'a Search Console property', so the baseline of 3 is appropriate. The schema already provides the necessary meaning.

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 tool's function: 'List every sitemap registered against a Search Console property, with their most recent crawl status.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and distinguishes itself from the sibling search_console_sitemaps_submit by explicitly pointing to that tool for submission actions.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to list sitemaps and their crawl status) and explicitly names an alternative for a different action: 'For submitting or resubmitting a sitemap use search_console_sitemaps_submit.' This clear differentiation helps the agent select the correct tool.

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